The Sun. — London, England, 1844-02-07 00:00:00

in point of fact, where the poor railway traveller used to pay threepence be now paid sixpence, and where sixpence, a shilling ; and having the interests of the working class to look after, as well as that of their employers, he felt bound to make this statement, although it went to contradict what fell from his Honourable Friend the Member for Renfrew shire, when addressing the House on this sub ject last night. To return, however, to the pro posed Committee. Amongst the names now pro posed by the Government, he could count not less than five who were directors in railways, and the Right Hon. Gentleman himself (Mr. Gladstone), who would, of course be the Chairman of the Committee, though not a director, frankly admitted that he was a considerable railway shareholder. He (Mr. Wallace) in the course he now proposed to adopt, would proceed in the fairest possible way, for he should object at once to the first name, that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, being allowed to remain on the list. He meant no personal disrespect to that Right Hon. Gentleman; far from it, but he frankly owned he looked with gre-it suspicion at the entire com position of the proposed Committee. He had no other name to propose, so little did he care who were upon it ; his only object being that the Committee should be so constituted as to be entitled to the confidence of the public. He moved that the first name be omitted. Mr. GLADSTONE would only say one word upon the subject. If he had found that the rule in forming these committees was to keep out the names of parties who might be supposed to be interested, he need not tell the tfon. Gentleman, the Member for Greenock, that he she,Juld have been very glad to have acted upon it, and so evaded the duties which must necessarily have devolved upon himself, as Chairman of this Committee. But he found, on former occasions, that parties directly inter ested in railways did not, under similar circumstances, feel justified in shrinking from the performance of those duties on the ground of personal interests, It was a great mistake to suppose that any uniform feeling per vaded the parties interested in the several railways already formed, and those which were contemplated. In point of fact, the interests of parties connected with the old railways were distinctly different from those who were now, or who might be hereafter, connected with the new lines. Again, on those railways which were called high fare lines, the interests were anything but identical with those which were known as low-fare lines. If the House, on the present occasion, chose to adopt a new principle, he could have no personal objection to it what ever. He only wished it to be understood that, in the present instance, he had acted according to the princi ples which had been heretofore laid down.' Mr. LABOUCHERE said that undoubtedly, in ap pointing a Committee for any interest, mercantile or commercial, it was usual to put a certain number of persons on it expressly interested in the sub ject ; and he did not see why the House should depart from the rule in this instance. Certainly, therefore, if the Hon. Member for Greenock persisted in his amendment, he should vote against him, as, from the official situation which was held by the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade, not withstanding the circumstances which had been named, he thought it most important that his services should be retained. It was, however, quite another question whe ther the railway interest did not too greatly preponderate in the Committee now nominated.—(Cheers.) In look ing over the names, it certainly was his (Mr. Labou ehere's) impression that the railway interest was repre sented in it to a degree which might deprive the Committee of that weight in public opinion which it was desirable every Committee of that House should possess. —(Loud cheers.) That principle, however, was a totally different one to the urgent and inconvenient rule which the Hon. Member for Greenock desired to have intro duced, and, therefore, he must vote against the amend ment, and for the retention of the name of the Right Hon the President of the Board of Trade.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME said the principle was as stated by his Hon. Friend the Member for Greenock, however diffe rent the practice might have been of late years. He could speak from his own experience on this subject, for he had himself challenged the votes of Mr. Pascoe Gren fell and others, as shareholders in the St. Katharine's Docks, when the Bill authorising their erection was be fore the House. The Bill was brought up ; it was op posed ; and on a division being called, and- before it took place, he challenged the namesreferred to as persons who, being interested, ought not to be allowed to vote. On con sideration these votes were struck out.—(Hear, hear.) The House, therefore, had acted on a former occasion on the principle laid down by his Hon. Friend, the Mem ber for Greenock, and what had been advanced by the Right lion. Member for Taunton, (Mr. Labouchere), was not wholly correct. For his own part, he (Mr. Ilume) considered it was too much the practice to put interested parties on the Committees of that House. A Committee was appointed to ascertain facts, and to get at the real merits and the truth of the case. It was desirable to have parties upon it who were both for and against the object in view. A Committee so con stituted would always give them the best information, and upon that the House would always decide safely what course to pursue. He had always been of opinion, that no individual whatever should be allowed to sit on a Committee who had any personal interest in it what ever. He had tried often to carry that principle out. He repeated, that his Hon. Friend, the Member for Greenock, was right in his principle, though, as to modern instances, not in his practice, and he could not sit down without expressing his surprise at, and disap proval of, the great number of railway directors no minated on the Committee just submitted to the House. Lord HOWICK contended, that the case of the St. Katherine's Docks did not apply in the present instance. There the parties challenged were directly interested in the Bill before, the House. here a Committee was wanted merely to-judge what general regulations were desirable in the management of railways. The conse quence of acting on the principle laid down by the Hon. Member for Greenock, would be to drive from the Com mittee all the information and experience which Mem bers of that House, being railway directors and proprie tors, could bring to bear upon the subject. But he (Lord Howick) could not help thinking that as the Committee was now constituted, the railway interest was too strongly represented—(Cheers)—and that gen tlemen, holding high situations in these great under- ' takings were not the most proper instruments to effect the object that House was supposed to have in view.— (Loud cheers.) Why, these were probably the very men they might want for witnesses.—(Hear, hear.) It was bad to have one person as a witness, and the same person afterwards to draw conclusions.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the names of the directors would be withdrawn. Mr. ROEBUCK said the Government could not do otherwise than observe that the feeling of the House was strongly opposed to the Committee as now proposed: In his opinion every one of the names upon this Com mittee had been unduly chosen.—(Hear, hear.) Amongst a great number of other names upon it he found that of Mr. Russell, who was Chairman of the Directors of the Great Western Railway. This he thought most un warrantable, because the Committee would have to enter into negotiations with several of the railway companies. Now he would ask who were the persons to decide upon the manner in which those negotiations were to be car ried on ? The Hon. Member to whom he had just al- luded was one of those who was most deeply interested in the matter, and in his capacity of chairman was a person who would be very likely to come before the Committee as a witness, and also would be one most in terested in the negotiations. He could go through all that Committee, and point out scarcely one name un connected with either the Government or some railroad, while there was not one representative of any of those large towns to which there was a continual influx of travellers. He should conclude by entreating that some' more fitting Members should be selected for this Com mittee, who would be likely to attend more to general than individual interests. Lord J. RUSSELL did not entirely agree with the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath in saying that no director of a railway should be allowed to be placed on the Committee. Ho thought that to a certain degree the fact of having the practical remarks of those gentle men would be likely to have a beneficial result. With respect to the Noble Lord the Member for Totnes, he should say that he had been one of the members of the Committee, and at that time he had no connexion with any railway. He (Lord John Russell) thought that a matter for consideration, whether, if the directors of one railway were upon the Committee, those personS con nected with other lines of railroad, who did not possess the same privilege, might have reason to complain? Mr. GLADSTONE thought it most desirable that some railway directors should be placed upon the Com mittee. He differed froth the Noble Lord that persons •.ho were shareholders were more fit to be on the Com mittee than those who were directors, for many of the shareholders were more interested in the matter than the directors. There was Mr. Glynn, who was so ex tensive a holder of shares as to be qualified to act as a director. If the Committee wanted to have the informa tion of experienced and practical men, who were con versant with the subject under investigation, he thought they could not do better than to have a fair'proportion of railway directors. At the same time, while he ap proved of having a fair proportion of directors upon the Committee, he should state that he did not con:. Sider the question a new one. Previous ,to forming the Committee, the first thing he did was to procure a list of the names which were upon the former Committee of 1840, and he saw there the names of many gentlemen connected with railways, amongst whom were the Hon. Member for eunderland, who declined to act upon this Committee, although he was a person of great experience in those matters. There was also the Hon. Baronet the Member for Leicester, and the Honourable Member for Clitheroe, who was a Director of the South Eastern Railway, which was different from all the others, being what is termed klow-fare railway, and it was on account of the intimate acquaintance which that Hon. Gentle man had with railway matters that he selected him to be one of the Committee. .He admitted that the subject was one of great difficulty. According to the rules of the House a Committee could not consist of more than fifteen Members. Since coming into the House he had received many communications Worn gentlemen, n nected with various railway schemes in different parts of the country, complaining that their interests were not adequately represented in the Committee. If it should be the pleasure of the House to depart from the rule li miting the number of a Committee, although the prece dent might be objectionable, still it would tend to re • move many of these difficulties; but if it was determined to adhere to the number of fifteen, he,ilid not see how they could appoint Members representing all these diffe rent interests on the Committee. " He did not himself consider it a matter of importance that three or four directors of railway companies were included among the members of the Com mittee. The labours of the Committee were merely preliminary, and if it should appear that any recom mendation of the Committee had been carried solely by the votes of the railway directors it would lose a great deal of the weight which would be otherwise attached to it.—(Hear, hear.) There were many other gentlemen whom be should lave been. anxious to have seen on that Committee bad it been raetkable. There was the r Hon. Member for Kendal, who had on a former occasion taken a very active part in the revision of the Standing Orders relating to the introduction of Railway Bills ; and there was the Hon. Member for Inverness, who had also taken a great interest in the subject. He should have been rejoiced to have seen bOth those Hon. Gentle men on the Committee. The Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Bath supposed that he was wedded to his own opinion on matters of detail. He could assure the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that he was perfectly sensible of the difficulties which he should experience in adjusting these details, and that he should be glad of any sug gestion as to the best method of proceeding. With re gard to the specific proposition before the House, i f they postponed the question then they would be com pelled to deal with these difficulties at some future day, and considering the number of applications for Railway Bills that would probably be made in the course of the session, be thought it important that they should pro ceed with the inquiry at the earliest possible period. Mr. HAWES gave the Right Hon. Gentleman full credit for his anxiety to do justice to this very impor, taut subject, but he had not answered the objection made by the Noble Lord, that the railway interest was too strongly represented. The Committee would have to consider not only the measures necessary to be adopted for all future railways, but also what alterations the protection of the public might require to be made in the regulations of existing railways, so as to protect the public, against the monopoly which might be created by a concentration of interests. He objected to increasing the number of Members beyond fifteen, and he suggested the propriety of suspending the appointment of the Committee. There was a great preponderance of rail way interests among its members, and he would suggest to the Right Hon. Gentleman the propriety of substitut ing some other names for those of gentlemen connected with railways.—(Cheers.) He should wish to see his Hon. Friend the Member for Kendal on that Committee. His Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Bath had given notice of a motion on the subject of railways that pre supposed some attention to the subject. He should like to see the Hon. and Learned Gentleman appointed to the Committee. He trusted that the appointment of the Committee would be postponed after the objections which had been made that night. He trusted the House would be spared the pain of dividing upon the names of individual gentlemen ; but he also hoped that for some of those names the Right Hon. Gentlemen would substitute those of Members unconnected with railway interests. Mr. P. M. STEWART hoped the House would feel no delicacy in disposing of his name. It had been put in without any consultation with himself, and the first knowledge he had had of his appointment had been ob tained from reading the votes of the morning. He felt grateful for the honour which had been conferred on him, but he was not at all ambitious of serving on the Committee. It would be ungrateful in him to decline to serve, and he would at once state that he was an ho norary director of the Greenock Railway, although he never interfered in its management, nor was he a great holder of railway stock. If the construction of the Committee rendered it at all liable to suspicion, he would recommend the Right Hon. Gentleman to postpone the appointment of it. The Right Hon. Gentleman, how ever, was the best judge as to the proper course of pro ceeding to be adopted. He had been put on the Com mittee without his consent, and he was not offended in consequence ; neither should he take offence if he were put off without his consent. Mr. WARBURTON thought it right to state, as allu sion..had been made to him, that there were reasons why he should not be appointed on the Committee. He had no experience whatever as to the details of railway re gulation. He held a chief office in a society which re quired so much of his attention, that his punctual attendance at the Committee would be impossible ,; and although, at present, he was not a subscriber to any railway undertaking, yet he saw a notice of an applica tion about to be made for a Railway Bill to which he had no doubt his constituents would expect that he should subscribe ; and, therefore, the objection which had been made to railway proprietors would equally apply to him. He complained that there was no one on the Committee to represent the travelling public. He did not know whether the Hon. Member for Wolver hampton possessed any railway shares ; he no doubt would defend the interests of the public ; but he thought there ough t to be persons on the Committee who were neither directors nor shareholders. .He hoped the House would stick to the number of fifteen, for if once they infringed on that rule, they would never be able to adhere to it afterwards. face of the earth whether the poor of this country had not ground for complaint when such a state of things existed. But this was a mere difference in the value of the currency ; they must also take into account the deterioration in every branch of industry. Take the ar• tisan, the mechanic, and the labourer; he ventured to say that on the average it would now require more than the wages of two days to pay their taxation, while one would have sufficed in 1813. Take the iron manu facture. It would take three pounds of iron at the present day, at its present price, to pay the taxes, for which one would have sufficed in 1813. Look, again, at the cotton manufacture. It would now take more than two pounds of cotton twist, and more than four yards of calico, to pay the same amount of taxation for which one pound of cotton-twist and one yard of calico would have sufficed in 1813. If they went through the whole of the manufactures, they would arrive at the same result. It ,had been said by a distinguished political man, that the people, in fact, governed themselves ; that all the taxes were laid upon them for their own protection and benefit. Let them turn to local taxa tion. It was stated by the Poor-law Commissioners that the local taxation of the country amounted to twelve millions. That calculation was, he felt convinced, vastly under the mark. The local taxa tion of the city of London was stated by these gen • tlemen to be 188,500/. He would prove; beyond dispute, that it amounted to more than half a million, including taxes paid to the corporation, the taxes paid on coal and for public improvements, the poor-rates, the church-rates, and other burdens. This was 300,0001. more than the amount stated by the Commissioners. He believed that the local taxation of Eng land, Scotland. and Ireland, amounted to more than 25,000,0001., and when this was added to the general taxes, the whole amount was about 80,000,0001. And this was altogether independent of the sums paid to the Church and the Dissenting clergy ; and for the maintenance of places of worship and schools, which laid additional and heavy burdens upon the people. The principal amount was paid by a population of eighteen millions and a half; for, with all the complaints of their fellow-subjects in Ireland, he believed that the Irish were better off, as regarded taxation, than the prople of this country. He believed that, taking the last century, that the taxation of Ireland did not amount to one twelfth of the taxation of this country. Now look at the taxation of France. This year it would be little more than 50,000,000/., to be paid by a population of 35,000,000, and it embraced nearly all the items con tained in our local taxation. Now, why was this large amount taken from the toil, the skill, and the sweat of millions of the labour ing population ? Why, they must have a standing army and military police, otherwise these things would not be submitted to. How did that ques tion stand ? The number of the army, independently of the artillery and the engineers, in the year . 1822 was 91,750. Last year, the first estimate was 129,481. There was, indeed, an assurance from the Government that 5,700 men would be reduced ; but, instead of ful filling that promise, they came down before the end of the session with a Bill to add 10,000 men to the existing force ; not in the ordinary mode, but establishing, for the first time in the history of this country, a permanent military force, answering to the Prntorian guards in ancient Rome.—(Laughter.) The present Government might not intend this force to be permanent, but they had established the principle—(Hear)--and such would be the pressure upon this country, that some of their successors would constitute the force in the way that be had described. Why, under the existing law the Go vernment had power to take any numbr out of the 129,000 men to the amount of 10,000, place them on half-pay, and then embody them at their own pleasure as military police, or gendarmerie. The last vote of the boroughmongering Parliament fixed the entire force at 109,180 men; the vote of the Reform Parliament last year fixed the number at 139,481 men, 30,200 more than the force under the old boroughmongering system. —(Hear, hear.) Their system of taxing the people was most partial and unjust. Under the most despotic Governments of Europe the wealthier classes paid the larger portion of the taxes. In Prussia, Austria, and many other countries, the taxes were laid chiefly on, land. The operation of the income-tax had proved that they could suck no more out of the people of this country. Take the article of tea. At the public sales yesterday and the day before there was tea sold at 10d. and ls. per lb. ; it paid 2s. 2d. as tax. There was tea sold at ss. per lb., and that paid the same tax. Thus the poor paid five times as much as the rich for this article of consumption. For the commonest brown sugar, which was mixed to a great extent with unwholesome materials, the poor paid the same tax as was paid by the rich on the whitest refined sugar. Take the instance of tobacco. To be sure it might be said that the poor man ought not to enjoy such a luxury — but he had been accustomed to it, and it was one of those things of which he could not be deprived. A tax of 800 per cent. was paid upon tobacco, whilst upon cigars, which could be obtained only by those in better circumstances, the tax was only 140 or 150 per cent. They imposed a tax of 100 per cent. upon the poor man's beer ; but upon their own Burgundy and Cham pagne no more 15 or 16, or, at the most, 17 or 171 per cent. He asked them, therefore, if they could stand up and say that these were not grievances, into which the representatives of the people were bound to inquire 7 (Dear, hear.) He would conclude with warning the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department that things were now approaching to the state, of the possi bility of which the Right Hon. Gentleman had, on a former occasion, warned the House. So many of the people were dying of hunger in this metropolis, that the richer classes and the clergy were forming themselves into associations to check the progress of destitution and famine.—(Hear, hear.) It was known that ten millions of the people were subsisting upon the food of cattle.-- (Hear, hear.) He would now conclude, in the words of the Right Hon. Baronet, when he said that "If ever the time came that this country should present the specta cle of millions of the people in a state of starvation, then they would sweep away titles, honours, pensions, and estates." — (Ch eers. ) He seconded the resolution. The SPEAKER having read the resolution, a pause of two or three minutes took place, when, after loud cries of " Ques tion, question" from the. Tory benches, Sir ROBERT PEEL rose and said that he was perfectly willing to admit that the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Rochdale, was fully entitled to the credit which he had claimed for himself at the commencement of his speech, for the motives which actuated him in bringing forward this reso lution, and also for the moderation with which he had per formed the task.—( Hear, hear.) He thought it would not be just to accuse the Hon. Gentleman of any intention to ob struct the business of the House, by moving adjournments from time to time until the object of his motion should be attained. He was sure that he rightly estimated the good sense of the Hon. Gentleman, when he believed that the Hon. Gentleman, unless he knew that he was supported by a very great portion of the House, would not feel hims elf justified in adopting such a course. — ( H ear.) But whatever course he (Mr. Craw ford)hoidet notmighrt nkhereaftereo would hany o t uf h gu in ht k Proper to take, he (Sir R. Peel) to offer that as an objection to to o i be met up on it s own groun d s , an d be f future course he might take. He thought ntd in resolution, r e t f h enwittwhich c it ought also to be met in a fpirit corresponding to that in which it was brought forward. He would, therefore, only ask the House, whether it would be consistent with the public interest that they shbuld vote in favour of that resolution ?—( Hear. ) The resolution was a twofold proposition—first, that it was the immediate duty of the House to inquire into the grievances of the people ; and, secondly, that the House was not competent to grant the supplies nn account of the defects of its constitu tion. If this resolution were carried, then the House would have declared itself criminal in the eyes of the country, and the sooner it abstained from exercising its functions, and ab dicated its authority, the better. The first part of the reso lution bore upon an the political and soc i a l institutions of the country.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") 3 he second part complained first of the East India Company monopoly— next, of the monopoly of the Bank of England. It then passed to the poor-law, which the Honourable Member con sidered a just ground of complaint on the part of the people, the Hon. Gentleman insisting that both the enactment of the law and its administration were of a nature which demanded an immediate inquiry — (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Sharman Crawford.) The resolution then passed to the Church Estab lishment, which it said the people of this country were dis posed to complain of—which was, in this part of the empire, a public - grievance ; in Ireland still more so, on account of the peculiar circumstances of that country ; and even in Scotland a grievous and fruitful source of discontent.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman complained abo of 'the establishment of the constabulary force in the rural districts; and next he (Mr. Sharman Crawford) thought that the ancient custom of the country, that each locality should appoint its own constables, should be restored. The Hon. Member for Rochdale next passed to the corn-law. and seriously told the House that until this, and all the other ingredients in his aggregate of grievances were inquired into the supplies should be withheld. Did the House suppose that if they went into that inquiry they should have arrived at a conclusion satisfac tory to the Hon. Gentleman or to the country before the sth of April.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) If the House were now to institute an inquiry into all the relations of the different classes of society, and into the functions, duties, privileges, and constitution of each of the three estates, when would the in quiry end ?—( Hear, hear.) It was quite clear—indeed he thought it was quite clear to the Hon. Gentleman himself— that the proposition was utterly impracticable. Even if it were wise to institute such an inquiry, he would ask did the Hon. Gentleman himself think it would lead to the redress of these grievances, if such they were ? He (Sir R. Peel) did not think that the Hon. Gentleman had any party object in view when he brought forward this motion. He meant to say that he did not think the Honourable Member bad any intention of bringing it forward for the purpose of an noying or obstructing the party who, from political motives, sup ported those who managed the affairs of the Government in that House. He thought that nothing could result from the inquiry. How could it ? The only effect would be to raise expectations which could never be realised, and to give forth to the world an acknowledgment of the folly and incapacity of the British House of Commons.—(Hear, hear .) The Hon. Member had not contented himself with putting forth these propositions, but told the House not to vote supplies, as they were not the representatives of the people ; and in sisted that a very extensive reform of Parliament was a ne cessary preliminary before the House should proceed to exer cise any of its functions. The Hon. Gentleman told them that there were 6,000,000 of adults in the empire, and that only 1,000,000 were represented in Parliament, and he thought that it was an injustice to the other 5,000,000 that they should be subjected to taxation. The Hon. Gentleman insisted that representation should be co-existent with taxa tion, and yet he would confine representation to - adult males. But females also were subject to taxation. why did he not give them the franchise ? They had the power of voting in many institutions, and there could be no reason for excluding them from the Parliamentary franchise if it was to be co-extensive with taxation. Mr. S. CRAWFORD—Certainly not.—( Laughter. ) Sir R. PEEL must say then that the Hon. Member for Rochdale was a very great Reformer indeed --(Laughter. ) Why did the Hon. Member confine the franchise to adults ? Persons below the age of maturity were subject to taxation. They were subject also to military service. Why, then, on the Hon. Member's own principle, did he exclude them from the franchise ? The proposal of the Hon. Gentleman, there fore, was neither more nor less than this, that the whole po pulation of this country, without reference to the possession of a house—the whole population of every part' of the United Kingdom, who contributed to the taxes by indirect taxation, should, wale and female, be entitled in point of justice to a share of the suffrage. Was it. possible, supposing the principle of the Hun. Gentleman to be just—was it possible for him to test it by practical application ? If he put it in ope ration he might depend that - his new House of Par liament would be ble o precisely the same at a minority was prepared to refuse the supplies. He wished a majority to go with him in affirming the prin ciple that grievances should be redressed before the supplies were granted. It - was not his intention, after a vote should be taken on this question, to interfere further in opposition to the Government.—(Hear, bear.) He felt that no individual Member ought to undertake or attempt to proceed in a course with regard to the supplies, which would not be supported by public opinion out of doors, or that would not be supported by a sufficient number of Members in the House.—(Hear, hear.) He was not the man to undertake this. He wished to bring his proposition fairly before the House and the public, and it would then be for the advocates of popular rights and the public to take any course they might think best. Such a proceeding as that of raising the question of grievances on the motion of sup plies, ought to be supported by public opinion, or else it could have no weight, nor could it ever be of any use. He did not contemplate a system of factious adjourn ments, but his object was, if possible, to get a majority with him. Although he might on this occasion be defeated by the majority, yet he would never , despair of ultimately obtaining a majority with him. He did not charge the present Government in particular with inattention, fur other' Governments had been equally culpable, and he knew that the late Government was as much to blame as the present one. He was aware that he should be opposed in his motion by perhaps the principal supporters of the late Government, and he therefore wished it to be distinctly understood that he made no accusation against the present Govern ment. He wished to impress on the House the necessity of inquiry. He said that if the Government refused to grant that inquiry, it then became the duty of that House, as a body, to refuse the supplies until such inquiry were obtained. This was a constitutional principle which he was desirous of carry ing out.—(Hear, hear.) He wished the House to reflect upon the situation in which it was placed with the coun try. It stood, as it were, as a criminal at the bar, the charges against it being its own votes.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish to trespass further on the attention of the House, but he trusted that it would be conceded that he had brought his motion forward temperately, for he had endeavoured to avoid everything which might f3r a moment give offence to any one.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving—" That whereas complaints have been made to this House on various oc casions, by petition, to the effect that the people are suffering under unjust and partial legislation, and under the effects of monopolies of various kinds, political and ecclesiastical, created and kept in existence for the benefit of favoured classes ; that by the taxes imposed on food, for the support of one of these monopolies, the supply is restricted and the price raised, whilst at the same time the demand for labour is diminished and wages reduced, and the profits of manufacturing and commercial industry deeply Injured ; that the burthen of general taxation has been increased to an intolerable extent, by an extravagant expenditure in every depart ment of the State, and that this taxation is so imposed as to press most oppressively and heavily on the indus trial portion of the community ; that laws have been passed injurious to the rights of the people, and arbitrary proceedings of Government have taken place dangerous to public liberty ; that in order to sustain this system an unconstitutional amount of standing army is kept up for the home ser vice, and the ancient constitutional constable superseded by the hired police ; all which would be wholly unne cessary if the grievances of the people were redressed, and just and impartial government established. It is further complained, that these and other grievances are produced by the bad constitution of the CoMmons' House ; that by the limitation of the suffrage, the long duration of Parliaments, and corruption and undue in fluences in the election of representatives, this House, as at present constituted, does not truly represent, and is not responsible to the people, and therefore does not legislate for their interests ; that, notwith standing frequent respectful petitions presented to this House, the complaints of the people have neither been inquired into nor redressed ; that from these causes an alarming state of discontent prevails generally over:the United Kingdom : It is therefore the immediate duty of this House to make inquiry into these complaints ; and as this House can have no right to vote supplies except as being the representatives of the people, it is impera tively necessary that the charges brought against its present constitution and competency in the petitions which have been received and recorded among its pro ceedings, should be inquired into, and, if found to be justly made, redressed, before this House shall proceed to the voting of supplies." Mr. W. WILLIAMS said his Hon. Friend having stated so clearly his views on this question, he had no hesitation in seconding the resolution. He confessed that if it had involved the principle of a small minority, factiously opposing the granting of the supplies against a large majority, he would not have been prepared to have taken that course. The object of this motion was simply:to inquire into the grievances of the people. The first important point to establish was the existence of those grievances. His lion. Friend had stated generally what he considered to be those grievances, as they had been described in petitions which had been laid on the table of that Hous?. His Hon. Friend had not in his motion gone any thing approaching so far as examples which might be found on the Journals of that House, but espe cially in the opinion expressed by the Noble Lord the Member for London (Lord J. Russell) when he introduced into that House the Reform Bill. The Noble Lord on that occasion stated to the House the object he had in view in proposing that Bill, in the following words :—" I propose that the people should send to this House their real representatives, to deliberate upon their wants, to consult upon their interests, to consider their grievances, and to attend to their desires." Now, nothing was expressed in the resolution proposed by his (Mr:W.'a) Hon. Friend, that was not expressed in language much stronger, in his opinion by the Noble Lord, when he in troduced the Reform Bill. He would ask any Hon. Member whether the Reform Bill had produced the re sult anticipated by the Noble Lord ? He believed that every honest man would answer in the negative. When that Bill was introduced, the entire people of this coun try exhibited a willingness to risk even their lives and property in defence of that measure, which they anti cipated would secure to them those benefits which the Noble Lord had described. Their anticipations had been attended with nothing but disappointment. - Some times three millions of the people presented a petition, in which they stated that that House did not represent them. They had many examples of proceedings in that House which went farther than the motion of his Hon. Friend. In the year 1642, when the Monarch of that day attempted to raise taxes without the authority of the House of Commons, when he pro ceeded to accomplish his object, the House of Commons resisted the arbitrary attempt, and the first great and important step they took in opposition to the tyrannical attempt was to give direction to the Lords of the Trea sury to stop the supplies. This step not only put a stop to the King's object, but ultimately led the Sovereign to the scaffold. Again, in the reign of William the Third. That Monarch, in ascending the throne, entered into a compact with the people, which compact was usually called " The Bill of Rights." As soon as he had as cended the throne, he neglected his engagement, and endeavoured, by all the means in his power, to avoid it. The House of Commons and the House of Lords had then virtue enough to enforce that Monarch's compliance with his engagement ; and, in 1683, a Bill passed both Houses of Parliament, by which Parliaments were made triennial. That Bill was rejected by the King. In the next year the Parliament repassed that Bill, and the Parliament, according to Burnet, told the King that unless he gave his assent to that B:11, that he would re ceive no supplies, and no supplies were voted until that Bill received the Royal assent. The first and most im portant proposition in the resolution of his Hon. Friend was that that House did not represent the people. How did the question stand with regard to the represen tation of the people in that House ? Five millions out of six millions of the people were without any voice at all in the representation ; yet two-thirds of the taxation were borne by the non-represented classes. The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, in introducing the income-tax, said he could not consent to increase the burdens on the lower classes, saying he could bring conclusive proof to show that taxation had reached its limits.—(Hear, hear.) These were the opi nions of the Right Hon. Baronet. Judge Blackstone laid it down as his opinion that the people should ac quiesce in the judgment of the law because they had a voice in the making of those laws through their repre sentatives. But what could be said for the five millions who were without representation ; and yet what could be done without them? - He would next turn to the con stitution of that House itself. What could be more monstrous, more base, than the bribery so often proved before the Election Committees ? When Mr. Maddocks brought a charge against a Member of that House, at the time of Lord Castlereagh, that Noble Lord said the sale of seats in that House was as notorious as the sun at noon-day. The Honourable Member then quoted several instances of bribery at elections, and then alluded to the deficiency of voters. Seventy-one towns returned to that House 121 Members, with a constituency less in number then the West Riding of Yorkshire; 20 towns, with a consti tuency of 2,923, returned the same number of Members as 20 other towns, having a constituency of 153,940. Lord Chatham said that taxation without representation was unconstitutional. Locke and Lord Grey were of a similar opinion, opposed to these opinions were the facts, that Harwich returned four Members . to Parliament, whilst the West Riding of Yorkshire and the great town of Manchester returned only the same number. The taxation had increased in an alarming proportion. In 1/336, the expenditure was 44,200,0001, in 1843, 51,700,0001., being 7,500,000 L more than the taxation of 1836, and the difference was suffi cient to maintain every department of the United States annually, and yet that great country had paid its debts to the last farthing.—(Hear, and laughter.) He spoke of the Government of the United States, and not of the States themselves, but he believed they too, would discharge their debts.—(lronical cries of " .Hear, hear.) The people were subjected to a greater taxa tion now than in any one year during the last war. Me took for his authority one of the most enlightened men of his day—who had written with as much ability as any man living, and proved himself to be well ac quainted with the position of this country—he meant the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Like all prudent men, the Bight Hon. Baronet made all his statements under the mark ; and what did he state ? In the year 1812, he said, the amount of the taxes was 61,200,0001., the price of gold 5/. Is. per ounce ; in 1813 the amount of the taxes was 73,300,000 L, the price of gold 5/. 6s. lid. per ounce. In the first in stance there was a depreciation in the currency, as com pared with the standard value, of 38i per cent. ; in the second instance the depreciation was 41 per cent. Re duce the amount to the present standard, with gold at 3L 17s. 100. per ounce, and it would appear that the average taxation of those five years was forty-five Millions, tn millions less than in the twenty-eighth year of pe ace. He would ask_every honest man on the Mr. G. A. HAMILTON trusted that if the name of any gentleman were substitued for his on the Committee it would be some gentleman connected with Ireland. Sir JOHN EASTHOPE had no objection to have the name of some other gentleman substituted for that of himself, if such were the desire of the House. Mr. GLADSTONE would not object to postpone the appointment of the Committee as so many gentleman had expressed their willingness to retire. Sir G. GREY hoped that, in the reconstruction of the Committeee, the Right Hon. Gentlemen would take care that every part of the country should be adequately represented. Mr. WALLACE had not made a personal objection to any one, and he trusted that no misunderstanding would exist on the subject. The motion was thtn withdrawn. MERCHANT SEAMEN'S FUND. On the motion of Mr. GLADSTONE, the following Members were nominated as the Select Committee on the Merchant Seamen's Fund:—Mr. William Gladstone, Sir Howard Douglas, Mr. Barclay, Mr. Lyell, Mr. Hodgson Hinde, Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Rice, Sir John Hanmer, Captain Gladstone, Admiral Dundas, Mr. Corry, Mr. Chapman, Mr. Ross, Mr. Hutt, and Mr. Philip Miles. SUPPLY—REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES. _ On the SPEAKBR being about to read the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of S upply, Mr. WALLACE said that he had some petitions to present: The SPEAKER informed the Hon. Gentleman that he could not present them. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose to bring for ward the motion of which he had given notice. He ad mitted it was an unusual motion, but the reason he brought it forward was, that there was not a fair repre sentation of the people in that House, and that their grievances were not attended to by the House. They complained of the monopolies on corn, one of the prin cipal of which was the tax on food, by which the manu facturing and commercial interests of the country suffered. He would not at present enter on this subject. They complained of the colonial monopolies, of which the principal was the sugar monopoly. They complained of the banking monopolies, and the East India monopoly, and above all, they complained of the monopoly of the Church. This was a monopoly felt particularly in Ireland, and it was now being felt in Scotland. The people complained of •an enormous burden of taxation caused by wars, which would not have been undertaken if the people were truly represented. He did not want, however, that the public cxedit should be destroyed by not paying the interest of the debt incurred by those wars. The people complained of the manner in which the public money was expended, and the system of taxation. They complained of their rights being in vaded, and of unjust laws being passed. They complained of the new poor-law, but the principle of this law he did not intend to enter upon. One of the Acts invading the rights of the people was the Arms Act. That iltiLct could not have been carried if the people were truly repre sented, and it appeared now that the branding of the arms would render it impracticable. But what he com plained of was, the arbitrariness of the Act. This, amongst other things, produced the cry ft a. the repeal of the union. The people frequently asked for inquiry, but it was uniformly denied. There was an inquiry de manded respecting the conduct of certain judges, but it was refused. They asked for inquiry into the standing army. There were, he believed, 38,000 regu lar troops, and 9,000 armed constabulary, in Ireland. These would be entirely unnecessary if the just demands of the people were attended to. But what they principally complained of was the state of the representation. Only one in seven had the fran chise, and could that be considered a fair representation of the people? Another reason why the people con sidered that this House did not truly represent them, was thit it was returned by corrupt practices. This House received the. petitions of the people, and had them recorded, but while they did not contradict their grievances, they refused all inquiry. One of the peti tions presented to that House was signed by . 3,500,000 persons. In that petition they used the following strong language. " Your House, as at present constituted, has not been elected by,.and acts irresponsive of, the people. It only represents parties, and legislates for the benefit of the few without any regard for the welfare or the in terests of the many." Thus, they challenged the House to the proof of what they said, but they were disre garded. On the occasion when the Hon. Member for Finsbury moved that no person should sit on Election Committees. who would not make a declaration that he had not used any undue means to procure his return, only 19 Members voted in favour of his motion, thus acknowledging the charges made against them, and that they were not in a condition to deny those charges. This House then stood in the position of an accused party. It. permitted no inquiry, and it did not deny the charges which were brought against it. The inquiry that was demanded in the petition of the Char-ists was refused;:the numbers being 287 against it and 49 for it. The House having been in that position, he maintained that it was not in a fit condition to impose taxes. The forms of the House allowed the people to call for redress of grievances before any supplies were granted. Those rules were framed for the purpose of defending the liberty of the subject. It was true that those rules ought not to be taken advantage of except under extraordinary circumstances, but he was there to maintain that those extraordinary circumstances now existed. It was not his object, as he had before stated, to force the House to commit itself to a particular-prin ciple of reform. His resolution merely required the House to consider the demands of the people, and whe ther there were faults in the system of representation or not. He was not going . to abandon those principles which he had declared, in his opinion, should be the foundation of reform. But he did not wish to commit the House, or any Honourable Gentleman who might vote with him, to this particular principle. lie wished the House to go into an inquiry, in order to ascertain whether that principle was a right one. It might be said that this motion of his would be a nonentity, unless it were carried further. If the House should affirm this resolution, he should then move an other resolution, to the effect that the House should either appoint a Select Committee or resolve itself into a Committee to inquire into the state of the representa tion. It might, however, be said that this inquiry would last a long time, and that the supplies could not be dis pensed with for so long a time as that inquiry would last. He did not wish to impede the granting the sup plies. But if the Government should think fit to grant this inquiry he would be ready to vote for the supplies for three, four, or sib months, or as long as that inquiry should last, The question now raised was not whether THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNE-SDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 7,, 1844 tack as the present House of Commons.—( Hear, hear.) He would find a petition would be brought up signed by several hundred thousands of persons, alleging that they were deprived of the right of suffrage, that they arraigned the Parliament as incompetent to perform its functions, and that the new House of Parliament, being so arraigned, would be bound, before performing its legislative functions, to admit its own incompe tency, and to institute an inquiry into the grievances coin plained of. He should have thought, indeed, during a great portion of the speech of the lion. Gentleman, that he was ,tenuously contending for a repeal of the Reform Act—( Hear, hear, and cheers)—and urging them to recur to the constitu tion of their old Parliament. —( Hear, hear.) For a great part of his argument directly went to show that the infusion of more of the popular and democratic principle into that House had disappointed all public expectation, and had inflicted grievance. and evils upon the country, from which, without that infusion, they would have been exempt.—(Cheers.) And this was not merely a taunt, directed at the Noble Lord, the author of the Reform Bill.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) The Honourable Gentleman was prepared with elabo rate arguments. was provided with returns and estimates, to show that taking the years from 1822 to 1836. under the Parliament as at present constituted, under the Parliament, reformed as it is, there had been an ad lition to the burdens borne by the people.—( Loud cheers.) In 1822, he said the unreformed Parliament only required a standing army of 91,000 men ; bat he said they reformed the Parliament, they permitted the middling classes to exercise an influence over elections, and that was the result. The standing army has been increased from 91,000 to 137,000 men !—( Cheers.) And taxation has been increased by the amount of ten millions I— ( Cheers.) Why, it appeared to him, the Hon. Gentleman's legitimate conclusion must be—let us go back to the times when the standing army was only 91,000 men, and when taxa tion was ten millions less—(Hear, hoar)—rather than follow the Hon. Gentleman on the path be himself invited them to pursue—a farther reform of the Parliamentary constitution of the country.—( Hear, hear.) And all the Hon. Gentleman's arguments went to show that attachment to liberty, and re sistance to oppression, did not at all depend on the Constitu tion itself; for see, said the Hon. Gentleman, what the Par liament did in 1693 !—(Loughter and cheers, and" 1642" from an Hon. Member.) The Hon. Gentleman said 1642, but he ( Sir R. Peel) was speaking of 1693. The Par liament then passed what some called a Bill, and others a De claration of Rights, in which the Parliament claimed for the people the right of having their Parliaments frequently called together. William the Third—a power ful Monarch, with strong claims on the gratitude of the people, departed from that claim, and the House of Commons refused the supplies, or menaced to do so, till the faith of the Crown was pledged that the claim should be fulfilled. Yet that virtuous Parliament which, backed by the House of Lords, for two successive years controlled, and, in the opinion of the Hon. Gentleman, justly controlled, the Crown—that Parlia ment had a much less free constitution than the Parliament in which the Hon. Gentleman himself held his seat.—(Loud cheers.) If. then, he were to judge from the greater portion of the Hon. Gentleman's speech, his decided inference would be this, that the Hon. Gentleman was no friend to popular principles—(Cheers and laughter)—his inference would be, that this gentleman was making an ingenious and logical argu ment for the purpose of showing that it would be wise for them at the present day to go back to the period of 1822, and still wiser, if they had the courage to do it, to go back at once to 1693.—(Cheers and laughter.) That was the inference he should have drawn from the greater portion of the lion. Gen tleman's speech. But then there was a commendation of the present Parliament, qualified, however, in some material re spects, for the Hon. Gentleman payed a compliment to him (Sir R. Peel), for which he was sincerely thankful. He stated that when it became necessary to make great exertions in order to equalise revenue with expenditure the present Parliament did—what ? Did they impose additional burdens on the work ing classes?—(Cheers.) Did they tax articles of necessity, or those articles which had been so much con sumed by the people of this country that, though perhaps not to be strictly called articles of necessity, yet were so essential to the comforts of the people that they partook of the nature 'of articles of necessity ? The Hon. Gentleman's charge against the present Parliament was, that it had raised the revenue by three or four millions ; hut had it increased the taxation on articles of necessity? No; the Hon. Gentle man said, so persuaded were they by his ( Sir R. Peel's) voice, the effect of his turning round to this side of the House was so great, that the present Pirliament was content to tax themselves, and to lay that additional burden on themselves, instead of trying to raise the revenue from the great body of the people.—( Cheers.) They did so, and, in doing so, he could not think that they had betrayed that insensibility for the sufferings of the people, or that keen desire of promoting their own selfish and exclusive interests, with which the Hon. Gentleman charged them, and which, he seemed to think, formed a sufficient ground for abdicating their present position, and admitting the charge of their incompetency to be per fectly well founded. Why, with respect to a vast number of these questions, they were not unwilling to enter into inquiry into a great many of them. Take the poor-laws, for instance. The Hon. Gentleman represented the poor-laws as one of the grievances of which they had to complain. Why, did the House of Commons pass the poor-laws merely from a wish to pass a new law, and withoit any previous inquiry? A Commission was appointed by the Crown, an inquiry was made, and abuses were brought to light. In passing the poor-laws, the House of Commons had no other object than good— seeing the old poor-law was diminishing the cow forts, and undermining the independence of, the people ; and they incurred great unpopularity by attempting to intro bdeuecne In a a r d em e. edy ihen But , with i that respect w as n o t till to t a h ft e e r Bankgreat inquirycharter; h had e should like to know, after the Hon. Gent leman succeeded in getting a Committee of the whole House , and that a resolu it tion were voted that till the Bank charter was inquired into there should be no supply voted,—he should like to know how he would get any practicable inquiry into it ? But was, the Hon. Gentleman aware of the inquiry that had already been made into the subject of the Bank charter, joint-stock banks, and all the other banking establishments of this country? Had he made himself master of these inquiries? Did he know that for three successive sessions one branch alone of that inquiry occupied the attention of a Committee of that House? At the termination of the first session the evidence heard by that Com mittee was not completed, and with the universal assent of Par liament another Committee was appointed. That Committee sat during two sessions, and even then did not make a report to the House. Was the Hon. Gentleman ignorant of this inquiry? If he were not, how could he affirm that we have entered into none of there grievances. If he thought the inquiry had been an evasive one, he only wished him joy of the sort of inquiry which he would get at the bar of that House into all the questions of the Bank charter, joint-stock banks, and the whole currency of the country. And what were they to do with the question of the Established Church while that inquiry went on ? He would venture to say that the inquiry into the Bank charter and the whole change of the currency in 1819, would occupy five months, and he must therefore postpone, ad Grcecas Ka lendas, the inquiry into any other subject. But, in fact, these questions had been inquired into already, by the effective intervention of a Select Committee. With respect to other questions, such as the Church establishment, reform of Parliament—these questions were rather to be decided on by the deliberate sense of the House, after due discussion, than by inquiry either by a Select Committee or by the whole House. On these grounds, then, and without raising any other objections to the motion of the Hon. Gentle man, he felt bound to resist it. He contended it was utterly impracticable ; it would be absurd to pass a resolution pledging themselves to an inquiry into all these eight on ten subjects, which constituted almost the whole state of their domestic society ; for the House of Commons to present itself to the people, confessing its own incompetency, declaring itself to be criminal, and abdicating its functions, because a petition was presented two or three years since charging them with having an imperfect constitution, on account of the right of suffrage being; withheld from a great portion of the pe o p le —he son fessed be thought it very improbable that the H ouse of Com mons would consent to place itself in that p osition before the country.—(Cheers.) With respect to many of the details into which the Hon. Gentleman had ventured, on a g eneral occasion like thii, they hardly admitted of a satisfactory examination. With respect to the article of tea, he stated that we had committed a gross and scandalous injustice, because they placed an equal duty all kinds of tea. Why, the opposite system was tried, and there was at one time a discriminating duty on the article. That system was abandoned—not by an act of the Government, but after a mature inquiry before the House of Commons, and in consequence of the difficulty attend ing the collection of the discriminating duty. It was not abandoned from any desire to bear hard on the interests of the working classes, but because the interests of the revenue re quired it. He vent tired' to say that if the Hon. Gentleman could insure an equal amount of revenue by the operation of the discriminating duty, there would be no objection to ap portion the tax to the quality of the tea. With respect to the duty on beer, that did not weigh with particular force against the present Government, by one of the members of which the tax on beer, as distinguished from malt, was removed. He altogether denied the charges brought against that House. A full inquiry had been instituted into several of these matters, and he believed there was a strong desire on the part of that House with regard to taxation, to consult the interests of those upon whom, under any sys tem, the burden of taxation must fall. But above all, con tinued the Right Hon. Baronet, I conjure the House not to lower itself in the eyes of this country, and declare it is unfit to perform the great duty it is called on to discharge, by ad mitting its incompetency as a Legislature, because a petition numerously signed has been presented to it, claiming for the whole of the people of this country a right to the possession of the suffrage.—(Cheers.) Mr. HUME admitted that some of the arguments of his Hon. Friend were not so applicable to the resolution as others had been; but he put it to the Right Hon. Baronet who had just sat down (Sir R. Peel), and he put it to the House, whe ther any time could be more appropriate, any opportunity more convenient, for bringing his proposition before the House than that which had been chosen. The constitutional doctrine was to bring forward the state of the country when the means of carrying on the set-vice of the country were asked at the hands of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) Therefore, he thought the Right Hon. Baronet decidedlywrong in stating that this was not the proper time for bringing forward such a resolution. And had he (Sir R. Peel) taken any notice of the observations which had fallen from his Hon. Friends in moving and seconding that resolution ? Had he not merely skimmed over these ob servations, and directed his remarks to the resolution itself, refraining carefully from grappling with the facts and statements which were elicited in support of it ? Again, had the Right Hon. Baronet taken any notice of the general dis tress, the almost universal destitution, which overspread the country ? Does he deny that distress, that appalling suffering? No ! if he does not, then, why refuse to agree to the reso lution, for his Hon. Friend had distinctly stated that the chief ground on which he brought it forward was this far-spread misery. And all these miseries, afflictions, and casualties were in a country abounding in everything which could make man happy, and render society b'essed. And could any man shut his eyes to the facts adduced, and deny a due attention to the observations of his Hon. Friend? He (Mr. Williams) distinctly stated that it was on account of the frightful and in creasing destitution of the people, and on tbataccount only, that he asked the House to agree to the aesoluton that had been submitted to it.. He (Mr. Hume) did not ask the Honourable Baronet or the House to agree in all that the resolution stated, but he challenged them to look over it, and to deny, if they could, many of the statements it contained. But the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had, in fact, shuffled the question altogether.—(hear, hear, and laughter.) It did not appear to him (Mr. Hume) that the Government intended to do any thing at all this session for the people, but to go on, as they did last session, and let the destitution make, if that were pos sible, even greater head than it had done. He (Mr. Hume ) bad been urged, out of the H ouse, to su pp ort this motion. Out of doors they ascribed the m iser y and destitution that pre vailed to the bad legislation which took place in it, and to the suggestions in this resoluti on the y looked as a remed y , requir ing those in whom they c ould ho p e for s y m p ath y to g ive thei r support to it, as he (it Hume) felt himself bound to do. In the. year 1835, it was threatened to stop the supplies, but he (Mr. Hume) believed that he was about the only person who was sincere in his determination to do so, had the anticipated emergency really arisen. At that time an Administration—a liberal and popular Administration— had ben rejected by the Crown against the will of the House.—(" Hear, hear," from the Tory benches.) The Crown was about to go on with a Government which did not enjoy the confidence of that House. —(Continued cries of "Hear, hear" from the Tory benches.) What could they do, had the Crown persisted in its unwise and unconstitutional course, but deprive it of the means of acting in defiance of the House of Commons? Sir R. PEEL—" Hear, hear." Mr. HUME—What was their situation now'? If the Right Hen. Baronet had a majority it was well known to be a ma jority that carried measures in direct opposition to the interests and against the wishes of the people. Why, it was that ma- ' jority that voted the money. And, therefore, what the people wanted was to change the constitution of that House, alleging as they did that it did not truly represent them, their in terests, their wants, or their wishes. The people out of doors declared that the House did not represent them, but only a sixth part of them. Ile ( Mr. Hume) would go further than his lion. Friend (Mr. Williams), that a reformed Parliament as now existing had done acts which an unre formed Parliament would not have dreamt of deing.—( Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) They might cheer. He understood their cheers well, and in answer to them he would ask, did they carry that Reform Bill which was originally pro mised, which was originally proposed, and which, had it been carried, would have had a very dif ferent effect upon the national interests than the present 13111 had 2—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.) Did not the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) who brought in the Reform Bill in 1831 declare that the whole and sole object its flamers had in view was; that all should be represented in the Commons' House, and that individual interests and class legis lation should never mo7e be heard of?—( Hear, hear.) Did the Noble Lord do what he promised—was he permitted to do so? Was he allowed to carry his first Bill—the Bill really worth having ? No such thing. The suffrage was so narrowed and clogged in that House by gentlemen opposite—the Bill was so cut and carved, mutilated and maimed, that the objects which the Noble Lord intended were wholly and completely defeated. Aye, and the very author of the Bill itself turned round and assisted to check its free operation. Bet was that any answer to the people out of doers, or were they too proud and too strong in their majority to take any heed of them or their prayers. All knew how that majority had been obtained. Still he did not blame the House so much as many people did. Per haps the House wasbet ter than the electors.—( Loud laughter.) lie really believed this to be so.—(Cheers, and great laughter.) Much has he blamed many, very many of the con • stituencies, he knew well enough there were most honourable exceptions to the corruption which too notoriously prevailed in them. But many of them had acted a most corrupt part, sending to that House, by the filthy means of bribery, a ma jority of individuals who, the moment they took their seats, thought nothing whatever of the country, but studied and legis lated for class interests alone. These were the parties he blamed. In England there were only from six to seven hundred thousand electors who voted. Was the whole adult population to be oppressed because a limited number of persons alone, to whom the House chose to give the suffrage, were base and unprincipled in the performance of their duty? It was such reasons as these which had induced the bringing for ward of this motion. It was bad legislation—legislation in fa• your of monopolies and class interests, which had caused all these evils, and no wonder the people looked out for some radical means of staying this vicious legislation, and construct ing a better and worthier system. -Could there be anything more preposterous or more unjust than that in England there should be two classes— the free class and the slave class ?—( A laugh.) Why slavery did exist in England, and to as great an extent as in any other country, if not t.r a greater. He turned, the other day, to a definition of the slave and the free man, which he thought so good and so just, that he would read it to the House. The definition of a free man was—" One to give assent to the laws of the State, either in person cr by his representative ;" and of that class !Isere were between six and seven hundred thousand in Eng- land; for though the number of registered voters might be about nine hundred thousand, not more than the number he had stated generally voted. And what was the definition of a slave? This—" To have no will of his own in the making of the laws, either in person or by representative, but to be.ko verned by the rule of other men, set in authority over him." Now to that definition, which he had extracted from the Times newspaper—(A burst of laughter)—aye, but it was from a Times of some few years back, when it was the advocate of every sound and good measure that the country could boast of.—(Opposition cheers.) To that definition he (Mr. Hume) gave in his entire and beauty adhesion. So in England they had seven hundred thousand freemen, and all the rest were slaves.—(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches.) He was glad to hear lion. Gentlemen approve of what he stated, and he should be happy to hear a definition more appropriate, if, indeed, one more appropriate could be found. From some returns of the electors in boroughs and counties, the result of an analysis which he had made, was that 347 Members out of 658—that was a great majority of that House—werereturned by 180,600 voters. Consequently the power over the whole country was in reality • vested in 180,000 persons. Now, what did this show ? It proved the very limited num ber of the persons who had the power of ruling the destinies of the country, for good or evil. No more than one-fortieth of the male admit population of the country possessed the fran chise ; and this could not be considered a fair system of representation. So much for the constitution of the House. It was, therefore, idle to use the term of freemen lowards the unrepresented classes—they were no snore than slaves, for nu slave ever suffered so much from mismanagement as the great mass of the people of England. The Legislature, as at pre sent constituted, supported monopoly and heavy taxation, and no man could deny it. He thought his Hon. Friend's argu ment with respect to the poor-laws had been unfairly treated. The principle that every man should depend upon his own la bour instead of being dependent upon the industry of others —that was the principle on which he supported the Bill when it was first introduced ; but the cruelty and injustice was this, that while the Legislature declared that every man should depend upon his own industry, they passed laws which pre vented the poor man from procuring labour, and also taxed his food, and thus prevented him from supporting himseelf. He had even supported the poor-laws, because he considered that it prevented the idle from living upon the means of the more industrious classes; but, at the same time, he meant that the Legislature should give every man an opportunity of living by his own labour, and, to the honour of Englishmen, he should say that they always preferred getting their livelihood by their own exertions instead of being dependent upon others. What the country wanted was a system of free trade, by which the demand for labour would be increased, and therefore all monopolies were unjust. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite did not at all notice the subject of the corn-laws, and sorry was he to say that those laws were kept up for their own interests by both Houses of Parliament. The Right Hon. Baronet did not acknowledge that he was aware those laws had the effect of diminishing the demand for labour. He (Mr. Home) could only say that at least seven-eigththsef the revenue derived from the Customs was taken out of the pockets of the poor men, and yet the House of Commons burdened them with taxes and restrictions for selfish motives. Surely this conduct was unworthy of a number of gentlemen who called themselves Christians. The first evil under which the country groaned was a defective system of representation. Let the voice of the millions be heard within the walls of that House, and then no further cause of griev ance would remain. The only question was would anything be done for the amelioration of the condition of the people. Whenever any attempt was made during a remote period to urge forward the cause of Reform, the same answer was invariably given as that of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite. His Hon. Friend would be ready to adopt any arrangements that could be made, provided there was a beginning made in redressing the grievances of the country, for he was sure that where there was a will there was a way. The Right Hon. Baronet had admitted the existence of those grievances, and had said that the best and most proper place for inquiry into those grievances would be in a Committee of the House of Commons. Now he (Mr. Hume) would say, that there ought to be a Committee appointed to investigate every grievance, even if it took forty Committees at a time—(A laugh)—and let them bring a report before the House, and then have the House act on their recommendation. But whether they made this inquiry now or not, he felt as sured that eventually relief must be given. He perceived that the Hon. and Gallant Member for Lincoln seemed amused at some of his remarks, but he (Mr. Hume) thought he was the last man who would be induced to laugh at the distresses of the country. lie concurred cordially in all that had fallen from his Hon. Friend, and would support his motion, except the last paragraph of it. Colonel SIB THORP contended the Honourable Mem ber for Montrose was not justified in saving that the country was in distress, as in the county lie lived in every labourer was in full employment. He had received a letter the other day, a portion of which be would read. The writer says :—" Sir Robert Peel has every reason to be proud of the position be at present stands in from the improved 'condition of the country." That was the letter he had.--(Laughter.) He had no doubt the country would prosper under the present Administration, notwithstanding the poison and venom of the Anti-Corn-law League, and those quack doctors, who were going about the country, not caring how many they cured, and not telling how many they killed. Mr. TRELAWNEY said that he had been requested to support the present motion, but he was not prepared to go the length it proposed.—( Hear, hear.) He admitted the people had many grievances to be redressed, but he could not sanction the present proceeding.—( Hear, hear.) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the motion 22 Against it ... Majority against the motion THE LANDLORD AND TENANT COMMISSION. Mr. WAKLEY rose to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, with respect to the Landlord and Tenant Commission in Ireland. lie had been much startled the other evening, at hearing the Right Hon. Baronet declare that the Commission was wholly composed of Irish landlords. The other statements of the Right Hon. Ba ronet with respect to the Commission were very gratifying. He, however, believed that it was utterly impossible that the Commission could fulfil the desired ol'ject, if it consisted merely of Irish landlords. The discussion that evening with respect to the appointment of persons on the Railway Committee turned very much upon the appointment of persons interested in railways upon the Committee, to which much objec tion was erged. lie did not mean to cast the slight est reproach on the appointment of the Irish Commission, but he did say that it would have been more satisfactory if the Commission had been composed of tenants as well as landlords. He was sure that all the farmers' friends in that House would vote for such, persons being en such a Commission. He believed the complaints generally in Ireland were against the landlords and not the tenants; it therefore seemed but reasonable that they should expect some tenants on the Commission, lie hoped, therefore, that the Right Hon. Baronet would not ob ject to introduce some tenants into this Commission. An Irish Member remarked to him (Mr. Wakley) the other evening, that there was no tenant in Ireland competent to go into the in quiry. If that were true, it was the most extraordinary thing he had heard of. At any rate, if it were true, he knew that there would be no difficulty in finding tenants in this country capable of being placed on the Commission.—(A laugh.) He felt if this course was adopted, that it would give satisfaction to England as well as Ireland. Sir R. PEEL said there was one proposal of the Hon. Gen tleman which he certainly could not adopt, namely, that of sending English tenants to be members of the Irish Commis sion.—(Laughter. ) If he (Sir R. Peel) had made that pro posal, and had said that tenants in Ireland were not competent to be upon the Commission, what would lion. Gentlemen then have said ?—( Hear, hear.) He could well anticipate the man ner in which the Government would have been addressed. Mr. WAKLEY—I did not say so. Sir R. PEEL did not agree with the Irish Member, who ever he was. It was certainly not his (Sir R. Peel's) fault that these persons were not on the Commission. The first person the Government applied to to become a member of the Commission was Mr. More O'Ferrall.--( Hear, hear.) He was selected on account of the great knowledge lie had shown of the subject, and on account of the sympathy manifested by him for the condition of the occupying tenantry. That gentleman declined on account of his health. lie (Sir R. Peel) mentioned this to show that the Government had had no intention of mixing up questions of a religious description with the question to be inquired into by the Commission. He wished to show the animus of the Government in appointing this Commission, and he was sure that from the estimation in which the members of the Commission were held in Ireland, and from the sympathy they had shown for the condition Of the occupying tenantry, that public confidence would be given to them. The first step taken by the Commission was to put themselves in communication with the poor-law guardians, from whom they obtained a cordial response. The Commis sion had made their report, as far as it had gone, ascorre hensive as possible. As yet the labours o f the Commission had given the greatest satisfaction, and he thought under these circumstances that it would be unwise to make any alterations in it. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD wishcedomtomis,ta.sitoen,, t withoutat meaning to fasten any imputationon had been created the in lie was aware that a feeling of dissatisfaction -eater confidence if other Ireland in consequence of none butlandlords being placed upon the Commission. It would gi g persons, not landlords, were - pl v a e ced t on that Commission. He perfectly agreed in the possibility of placing tenants on the Commission. He thought such persons ought to be placed cat the Commission, inasmuch as they , were part of the great mass into whose condition the Commission had to inquire. He thought it would meet the views of all parties, if persons who were neither landlords nor tenants were placed on the Com- mission. Mr. ROSS could corroborate what had fallen from his Hon. Frend. He knew that tenants capable of serving on the Com mission could easily be found in Ireland. Lord ELIOT wished to know if the Hon. Gentleman meant that thcse parties should be paid for their services, or whether he meant that they would serve gratuitously ? Mr. ROSS had no doubt that many could be found ready to -serve gratuitously. RIOTS AT ROSKEEN. Mr. FOX MAULE said he wished to ask the Lord Advo• cate, whether any steps had been taken for inquiring into the treatment of certain persons taken up for having created a •riot at Roskeen, and whether any prosecutions had been instituted against any of them. The question which he was about to ask arose out of disputes connected with the Church of Scotland. A riot had taken place, and certain per sons were apprehended. The authorities were provided not only with the ordinary civil force and officers of the Ex cise service, but also with a body of artillery. Six men were apprehended on the 2d of October, and on the 3d, at two o'clock in the merning, they were locked up in a place of con finement. There was a guard-houie, which had been built for a barrack, the windows of which were secured by iron bars. In this barrack there was an inner room and and an outer one. Nothing could have been easier, nor could be more secure , than placing these men in the inner room, and filling the outer room with armed men ; but, instead of this, they l oc k e d the men up in a bank sate—(Laughter) —a room, the dimensions of which were as follow :—nine feet eleven inches and a half long, three feet nine inches broad, and six feet eleven inches high. This rJom had been built particularly for the ex clusion of all air or ventilation, and as a protection swainst fire. In this room they were locked up seven hours. One individual was taken so ill that he vomited blood—( A laugh )—the cries of the other prisoners forced the attention of his guards upon them, and one prisoner was re moved. The other five remained there until nine o'clock in the morning, and the Lord Lieutenant of the county, a hu mane man, who had acted wish the greatest prudence and eon" sideration throughout, ordered their liberation. He had been further informed that one of those prisoners had been discharged by the magistrates, there having been no proof whatever against him, and the other five were admitted to bail, and had net been yet tried. Whether these men were guilty or innocent it mattered not. If what he stated were true they were mot improperly and cruelly treated. He wished to ask the Lord Advocate whether the facts bore any resemblance to h what be had stated, and if so, whether he had taken any steps to punis the individuals who had committed so great a crime under the cloak of administering justice. The horrors of that place were not surpassed by the black hole of Calcutta. Ile wished to know from the Lord Advocate, if it was the inten tion of the authorities to bring those men who had been an cruelly treated to trial, where they might have an opportu nity of vindicating their innocence or satisfying justice. The LORD ADVOCATE said, that he had ascertaine d that the five individuals mentioned were confined in 1 13 apartment of small size, but not for the whole tim e specified by the Honourable Gentleman. They wer e , placed in this apartment because the authorities f eare d there would be an attempt at rescue, as prisoners bade lately been rescued from that place. The prisoners were locked up at three or four o'clock in the morning, And e ln e s Pe f fined till nine o'clock, but the doors were frequently o during that time, and they were often asked by "'- guards if they wished for anything. His attention had lately been directed to the matter by a paragraph in A l 'newspaper. The prisoners were brought before the She and the Lord Lieutenant the following day, but to these gee tlemcn they had not made the slightest complaint. He ( 45- Lord Advocate) had directed inquiries to be made into tbe matter, but he was not yet prepared to say what particullar.. course he might pursue regarding these parties, by whose rections the prisoners were confined; in fact, he bad H e been able to learn on whom the blame properly rested. regretted that a milder course had net been adopted. 1 1, 1 "7,, prisoners in other parts of Scotland who had been engaged ere the riots, were dealt with in a very lenient manner —they wf not subjected to much trouble or expense, and they were tried,.; at the local courts, where the degree of punishment that COw' be inflicted was limited. SUPPLY. h i 4 On the question for going into Committee of Supplf -e put, Mr. I3LEWITT said he hoped before the Speaker left th e Chair, the House would allow him to correct an un fair stel e :. ment which had appeared in one of the newspapers with rt pect to the question which he had asked last night on the 86. : ject of the Civil List.—(Laughter.) It had been stated 0 one of the Morning Journals that he had made a very it W 1!! allusion to the Queen in connection with the Civil Lie' st (Laughter.) Now he could truly declare that a more 't lei, and faithful subject of her Majesty than himself did not ete —(Laughter from the Ministerial benches.) The House le is ' perfectly aware that such a rumour as he had alluded to Ices f , circulation ; and if he had been the humble instrume nt of I to ting an end to the report, and of restoring her Marsty popularity—( Roars of laughter)—which she had itherto,„el; joyed, he should feel perfectly satisfied with the result.- - ( r ";, hear.) He could only say that he had not the slightest Web, Lion of bringing her Majesty into disrepute, but he thol r , that when false reports of this kind were circulated out of do mit an opportunity of correcting them should be a ff orded in t House.—(Hear, hear. ) The House then went into Committee of Supply. Their; solutions were agreed to. The House resumed, an d the port was ordered to be brought up to-morrow. The House then adjourned at Half-past Ten. W MIDDLESEX and SURREY GRAN D JUNCTION RAILWAY. We beg to call the attention of our rea ders to the above railway—an advertisement of which apPea." in our columns of to-day —not only on account of Al general merits as a junction railway, which cannot fail to interest the commercial and manufacturing interest of the kingdom, but also in a military poin t of view. It appears to us that the facilities which the proposed line will afford to the transit of troops and military stores to that portion of the coast of Kent in particular which has so recently attracted the attention of the Government, will necessarily re' commend it to the serious consideration of our pro' fessional readers ; and we ourselves are convinc ed that if the intended line should obtain the sanction of the Legislature, the defence o f the coast , e of Kent will be easily secured, without incurring Ws expenses of batteries and lines which was at , OI :„ time contemplated. His Grace the Duke of we ton, in his evidence before the Committee of the 0 0 . if of Commons in the last session, referring to the neeessia, of establishing a harbour of refuge between VOr mouth and the Downs, readily admitted tha t liti n v ot warfare, in the strict sense of the word, Nve s .. ;,k, sufficient to protect the coast from an invading "'"ifie and that the system of maritime warfare (by . 0 0 power of steam) was such as to render the s itua.t t i is of a fleet in the Downs totally insecure. N °µ '' ! thy clear that, by the junction line proposed betvveoeso Birmingham, Great Western, South W e stern , ver y Dover lines, a supply of troops from almost ,eebots part of the kingdom—from the most remote uojont and garrisons—may be commanded—say V I, or and Winchester, and Maidstone—withi n tw ..t of fourteen hours ; and within that time) the. (-)4- ot elf Kent may be bristling with bayonets ! W e 5 , 1 : trust that the line, in this national point of Yle - a_. for already attracted the notice of Government-o'ool our own parts, we wish the bold undertak i elf ion is, success. The atmospheric principle of locomot _f we observe, recommended to the co nsiderati on shareholders. United Service Gazette. SUPPLEMENTS RA . A."" - NT.4 n o g WITH THE " DISPATCH." Every Week during the ~,„L t s. GREAT NATIONAL TRIAL AT Pu"" A succession of PII ff,ISxE SUPPLEMENTS GRATIS WILL BE WITH THE DISPATCH. The First on SUNDAY, February 4, co n- /6 taming Mr. Sheil's Speech, a gem of oratory..: The Second (of the full size of the WEEKLY DISPATCH) on SUNDAY, February 11, con taining the Speeches of Mr. Whiteside, Mr. AS O'Connell, and other Leading Counsel wh o • may address the Court in the course of the Week, for which the services of several Short hand Writers of Eminence have been engaged. will bel.: The dimensions of the succeeding Supplements_ las t 514 gulated by the importance of the matter; but 1, 1 , 011:a., plement will be also of the full size of the THS F t he 10 1 704 form the early portion of the trial, and embracei Wyo., ings from the commencement to that stage a.,.. 1 Th(0 4 ,j begins, so that every subscriber to the o val PATCH will be in possession of a complete an o st u!;10.• cord of this great national trial—a trial which iielyeot a matter of history, and ever be regarded as an OP usual importance. aeo;,;iitte! A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH of MR. 0 will precede the account of the Trial, which t t he 0 07, by a Gentleman intimately acquainted ir ed 11 P,, D er Agitator," and consequently one who has treasured P reminiscences that will render the BiograrN general and. absorbing interest. r of 0 , 0 111 taill The SUPPL EM EIN TS, forming a great nal s od will be printed uniformly with the DISPATI,Ac'tavo v" , of uantity of information equal to at least an 1,000 pages. Age 1 3 t 0 g, Selo e Orders received by every Bookseller c 1 the United Kingdom, and at the DISFA"' — Fleet-street. n Of ....................,......-............... ; I:l s ° .v 4 CLOSE OF HOLIDAY:3.—NOW that the -eespecti• annual festivity is about to terminate, and th e r o fyoli t t; fill boarding-schools be re-instated by the busy throttg.., who, aspirants, the personal comfort and attractions iva'tives...o` become naturally an object with friends and r C e c eler 6t " great solicitude, Rowland's Afacassar Oil, for a the Or; the growth and for preserving and beautifying 1001' Rowland's Kalydor, for presering the skin .B and C°F9Po(l°llt°' and removing Cutaneous eruptions; and Kosidan , io ns, "' for beautifying the Teeth, and preserving the. ‘,',.. o coni: universally considered indispensable in the requisil otroll panhnents of the decorative repository. The u g l .rvea l 6°4 age.conceded by our gracious Queen, and the e, li a dorli vereiFris of Europe, together with the Beauties :roe con s ; the circles of princely and regal magnificence u o f thf A , firmation by experience of the infallible effie ac ,l.t , eo l vi i .": creative renovating specifics, have characterisen,'" m it to , PERKand given them a celebrity unparallelectioos, wlami's" articles. All others are spurious iron," BIRTHS. _...oees" On the 10th ult., at Creina, near Milan, Mrs . Arthw ton, of a son. Fuger , Pk , On the Ist inst., at Hastings, the lady of .0. the of a son. the wife of On the 2d inst., at Christ Church, Oxford, Rev. Dr. Jell, of a son. MARRIED. A( O. On the 3d inst., at Ferrin near Worthing, e rr f Woolgar, of London,to Mary Ann, second dati John Bright, yeoman. ht o _ ., DIED- On the 28th of December, at Malta, Heat Wield, the }p ang' est son of the Rev. Samuel Dendy, of Dorkin s tiff ? „ iii „,,,, DeOnidlyt,hoefBDthortkilitn.,g7tslkulrarlet;: A7:_of the:::,(111.4:: On the 30th ult., Mrs. Bowler, of Judd -place, 1 road. London : Printed and Published by UEI 4O 1 d, in SO No. 112, Strand, at The Sea Office N 0.112, Stra.l.44. County of Middlesex, Wednesday, February 7, lc lk ....... 1 bp