The Sun. — London, England, 1844-04-27 00:00:00

FIN -cf "Eva :7411 '4;l the Deg • in ugW,4l - 64fiel Colonial' idence is q ZiiT were or ts. were gexicon beiug scarcely' .es 1:121"t • Eas eds and ; North, iidlandi gork - tris allo" Black - Londe on rao3. nlv'szli" . Em ' ?Jere' - 20 0 :gt Awe' Itailwai 13s. 9 d*' Aidlandp in th eir n itiO ,ed that inst the must Wisiorist 3sisting tome by tht sUggel— the ea `n 3sivelY' i. ito 007 s ha/ 0 Tito le 111 1 7 - 75 3 . to ock and-r 102 t to„,: ree ive LC' ,dVallee g FrenCh . steady lye pet I uP° ll ` • p,ristal 18 ; and )ntiouls. ion Ar e ~h.sod e xtort! • prices 40Ir, le an": Ditr9„.4 (+l . ou ' 9114 0 . 77 ps± s 77 17 P o ' D% , ..•• , . , .00 • v- ;~ ~}fi;.a , , t .( n i „ f Cf.) •,t ;lc . ; tat 1 Q' .9i, of L 000 a 000::4, the '', sit ng a- IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, April 26. -Lae LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool iftek at Five o'clock. ,Several p e titi ons were presented f or a nd against the 4n ssenters' Chapels Bill. The Dissenters' Chapels Bill was read a second time P r °forma; and ordered to be committed on this day Week. - - - SLAVERY._ the Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition signed by venerable Thomas Clarkson, on .the part of ilia Anti-Slavery' Society. The petition prayed Illat their Lordships would sanction such fiscal regulation s as would admit foreign sugar into the markets in this country, provided it came from !ettlements such as those in the East and Manilla, where tree labour only was employed. The petition also prayed that tht-ir Lordships would not allow, either directly or i ndirectly,. the admission into the markets of this coun 11 7 sugar grown in Brazil and Porto Rico.: After a few wordy from Lord KINNAIRD and Lord bROUGRAX, the p tition was laid on the table. The. Earl of POWIS presented a number of petitions gnat the union of the sees of S. Asaph and Bangor, praying for the establishment of a bishopric in J aahchester. The Noble Earl gave notice that on tat early day he should call the attention of their Lord sips to that subject. - - • The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions againSt the`union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. The Bishop of EXETER presented petitions to the Utile effect. The Bishop of CHESTER presented similar petitions. a The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a peti u__Licnt from Dublin, praying their Lordships to legalise 4 ' re4l 3'terian marriages in Ireland. The .Noble Mar ts also presented several petitions, one from the Rev. pi; Turner, the oldest Dissenting minister in the 2 t111 , 1 3't against the Dissenters' Chapels 13111. Also in favour of the Bill. THE CA§i'OF SAItITEL GRAY. The LORD CIiANCELLOR presented a petition Foul Samuel Gray, who was confined in one of the goals Dublin under sentence of transportation for life. The r o titioner stated that he had sent a writ of error to their 'der thebdshiPe Rouse,- and he- prayed their Lordships to th inquiry to, be conducted without expense to to the The petition was ordered to_be referred Conimittee. Th e m„, MR. 0 BRIEN. on T ue , - "Z r q 111 -1,of CLANRICARDE gave notice that sp Y he should submit a motion,especting the pointment of Mr O'Brien to the magistracy in Ireland. GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA. The Ma rqu i s o f NORMANBY said he had a motion on the paper fur Monday next, with respect to certain tee, ent transactions at Owalior. It was his intention in making that motion to make some remarks respecting the'treaty of Bhurtpdre, but he had just heard that the enternor-General of India had been recalled, and if this was so; Of courselat pres!nt he :should refrain from ~tking such remarks. He wished to know whether the t ePint of the recal of Lord - E ll enborOugh from India was true ? . The Earl of RIPON said it was true - that the East India Company had recalled Lord Ellenborough. _ The E ar l o f COLCHESTER. wished to know if this iteP had received the sanction of hir Majesty's Govern n3ent ? - - . - - The Eail of RIPON said it had not. Lord BROUGHAM said it was a most extraordinary ti ling that th e B o a r d o f C on trol should have -the power , controlling every act of the Court of Directors of the fast India Company except that most important one the recall Of the Governor-General of India. This was a matter which might affect the surety of our Indian em pire, and , yet the East India Company were subject to no control with respect to it. He thought this was-a great oversight. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that so far from h aving been an oversight, it had been the subject of e gravest discussion. `after a, short conversation the subject dropped. WRITS OF ERROR. t jaord CAM PBELL postpone d the second reading of Vs Dill from M on d a y to Thursday next. OILILORD. AND: TENANTS COMPENSATION ' BILL. "'PORTMAN - moved the second reading , of this The o et 'of th 6 Bill was to give' to the,tenant pro r er Vor capita l , which he expended on his landlord's th i Vrci BE AUMONq opposed the , Bill. . He. believed 4 ,„' if this Bill we v e allowed to pass, it-would dead. to th *si litigation between landlords and tenants, and he -t na ef° " ,. 4ved that' the-Bill beteada second time that %Y . -sixteenths. the -t he Duk e o f RICHMOND was prepared to vote for 4 ftond reading/of this Bill, providedbis Noble Friend ma t T i.s ki . consent to 'send it to a Select Committee .up , l'he Iran:pi§ tif SALISBURY would be glad if means oo ld devised'fOr giving compensation to tenants .. for th il ou e ! r i mprovements, and be therefore thought this Bill p it to be referred to a Select Committee. • aj he Itarquis of LONDONDERRY said .this was a b e - Ject,pf very great danger and di ff iculty, and ought to t 4 Pproached with . great caution. =He did not 'think at thi s Bill would be so beneficial to the tenants of the cou ntry as had been anticipated by the Noble Lord op posite. (Lord Portman.) he Earl.of HARDWICKE opposed the Bill, on the Found i t ti d that•would,lf - passed, open the door to litiga- HeHe - thought the Bill was unnecessary, and he usted'their Lordships wc.uld ref Use a second reading 4 > it. - • - , 1 , 111 9 Duke pc - CLEVELAND said he should support the Bill;for he did-not believe it. would have the effect "'high bad. been stated by .the Noble Earl who had just sat down. He believed the-Bill-to be admirable in prin ciple, and one which would be very beneficial to the "`tlantrY of the country, and he shourdtherefore give it hia ent ire support. Lord REDESDALE believed the Bill ta be useless, said therefoie should support the amendment. - • ee" . r F: t o for Lor ds rs ee°l:nscifrom Lord PORTMAN, divid e d.. The numbers were—..: reading.; ......... 27 IQ* the amendment . Th e till w Majority L ord ,„ as then read asecond time. f wiIARN.CLIFFE presented several petitions 0. and against the Dis' adjour n edapels Bill. l' i lleir 'Lordshipi then 4.- • • LOUSE OF COMMONS, April 26. The Se.iiEit took the Chair at the usual hour. - • - NEW WRIT. . n11 . 11 93'1: MEMBE4 - (Mr. *Estcourt we helieve) moved that a new writ be issued for the election of a, burgess to Etrhap:tent for the borough of Horsham, in the —4, „. of the on. Mr. Searlett, now Lord Abinger.. ELL, e,t who was very 'indistinctly heard in the;;;Tetjeyl:ll ros o.call the 'attention of the Speaker to oe t his writ. had occurre d w i t h respec t to th e i ssu i ng , Ls writ. .11'e:wished to. know whether• it . would not - v on consittent with the forms of Parliament to issue at 't h ee 4 , writ for the election of a MeMber of that House, ther-oorn of - 11. Member who had been called by the le e ", of his father to the House of Peers—to issue that AP 4 lnediately,..that this fact became known. The e tit ' at son of a , peer was admitted into that House with bein.ll4Y preperty .qualifieation, without any inquiry (Ag,„ ll ,„arle as to his claim to such a privilege ; and he 6 "melt) could not see why. a new writ could not ILlaeued Without each delay taking place as that which he in:thia.case. • " SPEAIIER was understood to . say .that this bad .bein. settled by Lord Dunfermline when tii. - 7, l er of that House. It was perfectly true that on v death ofr pier, the eldest, son of that peer holding te t e a l, that : ll'oo2e :'ininiediately vacated his seat, but ~" °l 4e Wad no Means. of ascertaining whether such d he'r's claim to the peerage was bona..fide or not ; i k e„, therefore - the only safe course for the House to - tMaas to_ wait for. the issuing of a writ of summons. 4(67 Perfectly true that the eldest son of a peer was 1 4 ,i'L c ttfd intothat 'Tense without a property qualification; ini . was equally true that a' claim to that privilege e fe r t e founded on error. This had been shown in a k e c aWltieh. had recently occurred, in which an Hon. af t 'ei - qnalified as the eldest Sou of a Peer, and it t razds turned out that lie was not so. tub e . ESTCOUAT perfectly cencurred in the view taken was .by t he Speaker. e rp .iT.: a, few words from Mr. TUFNELL the new -"*" Was ordered. - - le.' LEEDS GAS BILL. f 1 .. - 0 - rECKE'rT moved that the evidence taken be "'Lne CoMinittee on 'the Leeds . Gas Bill, in the year - " th ' e aild also the evidence taken before the Committee ob . I Year 1843, be referred to the Select Committee the Leeds New Gas Bill.—Ordered. e t : : ES - AND BRADFORD RAILWAY BILL. kitt 3 4.0rder of the Day that the report of the Com feetLe upon the Leeds and Bradford Railway Bill be irr considered, U lu ARDY said that he thought it was'neccessary th e " ee shOuld be re-committed. He thought that Itaing Order which precluded Committees on p tt i: l 3l from - receiiing maps or-plans relating to coin rai4l,inea shnuld be suspended. When this question was ‘) to the Committee, he voted against the evidence '", oy thaopposing parties being recalled; but he now 4gat that he had construed the order too stringently, tu n " , the parties themselves to the Bill had p ro -- evidence that there was a shorter line than that to , sed by th em, it was. in justice to the public , and el t d - , - adrPeates of the' other line, only right that the ta o ' - t - •of both s hould be fully examined. He would h s v e , accordin g . to that view, that the Bill be referred - .Or to the. ommittee S i . , g sizremot seconded the'motion. th e E. COLEBROOK defended the decision to which by o ,`-oramitte e had come, and to which he said they were Prtre- the Order bound to come. It had, besides, been h i s to the Committee that the shorter line was in fhil i l'esPeets objectionable, if not impracticable. [At tooment Mr. C. W. W. Wynn was carried into the el:%sei upon a.'litter, borne by two of the mess en g ers, " L'ilteed - librn• upon the Ministerial bench, on the seat . th !,t.,to that nsually, occupied by Lord Stanley. During $,; silenest 'OceisiOned by this unusua l occurrence, Mr. eir4d.came into the House, and took his usual s eat, m oat attracting obseriable notice.] th at - r &S.- WORTLEy wished the House to recollect t‘e H-oa. Member for Bradford, only asked the I:use to re -commit this Bill. Had he asked anythi n g b i r li e this" most assuredly he '(Alr. Wortley) woul d xdi et e 9 PPosed him to the utmost. The question was by the the' Committee were-justified by any rule or wh .,,,e practic e o f t h at H ouse i n re f u sing the evidence ke , r l t r had been tendered. Had the matter been fully fair/y so—if they had reused to enter hqrugt whiFb they ought to have received, the n ref A WOrtley) - thoiight it would be c 4eult, fog them sh ou ,use to re -commit the - POr - this reason he support the mo ti on , o f the Hon. Member for 111 c 1 ford, atr • MILNES said the question of the reception THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 27, 1644, of the evidence had been decided in the negative after fair and due consideration and were the House to order the Bill to be re-committed, he very much doubted if the Committee would not again come to the same decision as that at which they had already arrived. After a few words from Mr. REDHEAD YORKE, Mr. C. WOOD said the position of the question was simply this—that evidence had been rejected which, according to. the ordinary practice of the House, ought to have been received. The parties ought to have the upportunity of putting in that evidence. Mr. ALDAN and Mr. HODSi,N having briefly ad dressed the House,. _ Mr. GLADSTONE was of opinion that the Com mittee which sat on the Bill were in error, and that the Bill ought to be re committed. The House then divided, when there appeared -7. For the motion Against it Majority for the re-committal of the Bill —lO2 The Bill was then ordered to be re-committed. NEWQUAY HARBOUR, AND RAILWAY BILL. On the motion of Mr. P. HOWARD, the Newquay Harbour and Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. LIVERPOOL G-AS BILL. On the motion of Sir H. DOUGLAS, the Lords' amendments to the Liverpool Gas Bill were agreed to. On the motion of Mr. MILNER GIBSON, the Man chest.r Royal Infirmary. Bill was read a second time. - Dr. BOWRING gave notice that, on Thursday week, he would call the attention of the House to the subject of quarantine. RECAL OF LORD ELLENBOROUGH. Mr. MACAULAY said he wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's crovernment. He wished to ask him whether it was t tie, as had been reported. that her Majesty's Govern ment had recalled Lord Ellenburough from the govern ment of India? Sir R. PEEL said—ln answer to the question which has been put to me by the Right Hon. Gentleman, I 1:1,--g to state that on Wednesday last her Majesty's overn ment received a communication from the Court of Di rectors, that they had exercised the power which the law gives them, to recall, at their will and pleasure, the Go vernor-General of India.—(Loud cheers from the Oppo sition benches.) Mr.-MACAULAY said, that, under those circum stances, he need scarcely say, that it was not his intention to bring. forward on Tuesday week the motion of which he bad given notice respecting the late events in Gwalior. He would reserve -the right of bringing that subject under the notice Of the House hereafter, but as the administration of Lord Ellenborough had terminated, he could not suppose that the public interests would be exposed to the smallest risk from the postponement of the discussion ; and it would be, more satisfactory to his own feelings, and it would clearly be more agreeable to justice; that no charge should be. made against that Noble Lord, until he was •able to attend in the other House to vindicate his character.- I (Hear, hear.) PRIVILEGE: Mr. ROEBUCK rose amidst loud cries of " Hear, hear,"and considerable confusion,in censequence of some Hon. Members not having taken their places.: We un derstood the-Hon. Member to say (for he spoke in so low i a tone as to be scarcely audible. n the gallery) that he would not have: risen if •he had not. .felt hiniself imperatively called upon "" to address the House. Hon. Members would bear in mind, that on the last even ing on which the House met, an Hon. Menther opposite, namely, the Hon. Member - Tor Canterbury, thought fit, in the performance 'of 'his duty, to make certain observations upon himself. To those observations he had given what answer be thought sufficient. The attack was made upon him in a speech --which was some what 'elaborate ; but he thought, the_ House would admit that he <Mr. Roebuck) did not lose his temper on that occasion —(Hear, hear)Und that- he spoke in such an off-hand way, that it might have been supposed that the matter would be suffered to rest. • An. HON. MEMBER 'here , rose to order. If the Hon. Member meant to complain of any proceeding tending to cause a breach of the peace, he ought not to use lan guage tending to create a breach of the peace.---(Hear.) The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was perfectly in' order.--(Cheers.) • , „ Mr. ROEBUCK said, that before he read to the House a letter, which he had received-from the Hon. Member for Canterbury, he would at once state_ that he had no.wish to give that Hori:Meniber the least offence. He then said, and he now repeated, that whenever he was called on to Account for, or explain anything that he might have said (as we understood), he should be pre pared to do so.—(Repeated cries of " Speak up.") He did not regret anything which.. had been said by him after the sort of mode—(Cheers)--in which the Hon. -Member for, Canterbury had alluded to him.—(Re newed cheers.) ; The expressions used by the Ho• nourable. Member conveyed an imputation of a grave character upon him . (Mr. Roebuck). 'The Hon. Member said that he had deceived his party — that he disguised' servility by severity, and (as we Un derstood) that he was seeltin;:. the favour of. the present Goternment;under the appearance of a foe.—(Repeated cries of " Speak up," the Hon. Member speaking in an unusually low tone r although.with.s. very.,emphatic man ner.) -- He had been called a -rebel to the Qqeen,,and the friend of Papineau. To that attack be had answered as he would answer over and over again, • but he answered only in fair Parliamentary- retort. He would now .read to the House the letter he had received from the Hon. Member for Canterbury. , The Hon. Member then read the following letter, but in the same indistinct tone : . . . " Travellers' Club, April, 1844. Sir,—l cannot. determine from the newspaper re port of your speech in the House of Commons last night; nor from what I understood when I beard it, whether to me personally you meant to apply the words dishonourable. motives.' If so, I beg to refer you to a letter ,which I addressed to my constituents, dated duly, 1843, in which was this passage—‘ That as I never asked .a favour of Sir Robert ~'eel' or of his Government, I could not have been actuated: by any disappointment or obligation - in vOtingagaiast them. • Now, I call apOn you to state that you did-not mean to apply these words to me ; find if you did so, either to retract them or to refer to a friend with whom my , friend; Captain Garrett, may communicate. " G. SMYTHE." (Signed) He (Mr. Roebuck) did give answer that Mr. Smythe should hear from him, but not.not by letter; but in the House of Commons. But he said to Captain Garrett, As far as you are concerned you need ; not be alarmed." Mr. SMYTHE—That was not the answer. The SPEAKER—Order. • • • Mr. ROEBUCK—Sir, I am now here to answer for whit I have said. • The SPEAKER said the letter just read by the Hon. and ,Learned.Member.for Bath, having been sent to him as a Member of that HOuSe by another Hon. Member of that House, and the subjeCt-matter of that letter having had its origin in some proceedings in that. House, it would be the proper course for the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. to hand it over to• the clerk of the _House, to be read by him at the table.—(Hear, hear.) Mr, ROEBUCK was understood to say he should not give up the letter, unless by express command of the House. ,He had considered it his duty to advise the House.of a fact, but he declined to give up a letter.— (Loud laughter.) Mr. CURTEIS said he felt it his duty to -move that the letter referred to be read by.the clerk at the table of the House. . The SPEAKER said he had. before stated the course that, it would be the duty of the House to pursue. He must now positively require .of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath to bring theletter up in order to its being read, as it must be the foundation of any, such further proceedings as the House might think•clue to its own dignity to adopt. Mr. It OEBUCK brought up the letter, which was then read by the clerk to the House. - • After a pause of a moment' or two, Mr. SMYTHE said the Hen. and Learned Member for Bath, true to his practice, as to his right, had taken one Hon. Member by surprise, because the answer given to him (Mr. S.) by the gentleman he had sent to the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath was not that which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had just reported to the House. The answer given by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath to the gentleman sent to him was this—" He shall hear of this." His (Mr. Stnythe's) Friend had replied that he must have " a definite an swer," to which the Hon. and Learned MeMber for Bath had rejoined, "He would send an answer." From that hour he (Mr. Smythe) had been expecting an answer.— (Roars of laughter.) Me (Mr. Smythe) could give his sacred word of honour that, .except to the friend he Aad sent to the llonourable and Learned Member for Bath, he had never opened his lips to any person, or made the slightest intimation of the course he was about to pursue. But this afternoon, he (Mr. Smythe) by accidetit met the Noble Lord, the Member for Newark (Lord J. Manners), who informed him that he had been given to understand by an Hon. Member of that House, that the Honourable and ~ Learned ~Member for Bath was about to bring this matter before the House.—(Hear, hear.) Inasmuch as he had taken but one gentleman into his confidence, while thei. Hon. :and Learlied Member for Bath hid chosen to take somewhere about five hundred into lii,s—(oh, oh)—he (Mr. Smythe) was well content that.that confidence should be full, unreserved, and ex plicit.—(Hear, hear.) And 'he must say this—that when the Hon. .and Learned Gentlemen .whO had just spoken abOut having only made use of alair parliamen tary retort—he should - have perfectly agreed' with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that his remarks had only partaken of the nature of a fair parliamentary re tort if he had made use of it for the first time.—(Hear, - hear.) But it must be in the recollection of the House that that Honourable and Learned Gentleman, upon . an, Irish debate, during- the- last session of Parliament, when he (Mr, Smythe) had already spoken, made a speech characterised by' severe and caus tic severity, with regard to himself,, making use of the same insinuation that,he had preferred on Wednesday evening. He (Mr. Smythe) was at the time utterly un able to give any reply to the insinuation,' because the Hon. , and Learned Gentleman afterwards left town to attend the circuit. But on that occasion he consulted a friend, who told him he could take no notice of what had been said, but that he Must contradict the insinua tion. 'And that insinuation he did now contradict, in the most immediate, direct, and public manner, because he Must he perrnitted .to say that it was a grave reflection on a public man, that he should be supposed to act IrOM ienal, low, and sordid motives.—(CheerS.) And- now- the, Hoe. and Learned Member for Bath had brought, the mattr:befoie the House, he must say that he - had done 'it in a different spirit from what he (Mr. Smythe) eNpected he would have done. When-he under stood t hothe,flon, and Learned Memberhad undertakun to bring the matter before the House, hnemiected thathe would have done it in a speech somewhat similar to those he was in the habit of making—a speech full of those aspersions he was in the habit of throwing out. But as the Hon. and Learned Member had not done so, it only remained for him (Mr. Smythe) most humbly and respectfully to apologise to the House, if he had done anything which involved a breach of its order and privileges.—(Loud cheers.) Sir R. PEEL said, according to the course usually taken in such cases, it would be necessary that both Hon. Gentlemen should give an assurance, which they would have no difficulty in giving, that this matter should not go further. • Mr. ROEBUCK objected to comply with this, because this would pre-suppose that he intended to pursue that course.—(Laughter.) Sir R. PEEL said that assurance clearly exempted the Hon. and Learned Gentleman from any suspicion of in tending to do so.—(Hear, hear.) The SPEAKER—It now only remains for me to dis charge my duty by calling on Mr. Smythe to' give the House his assurance that he will Lot take any hostile proceedings. Mr. SMYTHE—The thing is perfectly . (Laughter.) If the Hon. and Learned Member chooses to bring the matter before the House, and then says I am not one to bring matters to. extremities, thereby insi nuating that I am the person—(Laughter)—and throw ing the whole odium of the position on me—it is per fectly absurd, because you must remember the position in which the Hon. Gentleman p!aces me. If the Hon. and Learned Gentleman is willing to state, that he has taken the initiative in this matter, because he is the most diffi cult man in the world to deal with--(Laughter, and cries 'of Order, order)— because he has engaged in some half dozen affairs of this kind.—(Loud cries of Order, order—Chair, chair.) The SPEAKER—The Hon. Gentleman must see that his conduct was not respectful to the House. (He had been asked not to engage in hostile proceedings ; and he (the Speaker) now requested that he would answer that call. _ . Mr. SM YTHE—Then I will do so in one word. As it is impossible to determine whether the Hon. and Learned Gentleman is only here in this House as a Member. of Parliament, I beg in the most full and unreserved manner to apologise, for any . breach of formulas or forms of the House of which may have been guilty. I have no more to say, excepting that this matter will riot go further. FERRAND'S ACCUSATION. On the motion of Sir R. PEEL, the Order of the Day for proceeding with the matter of the complaint of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Beverley, and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, was read. The SPEAKER—Is William Busfeild Ferrand, Esq., in his place ? Mr. Ferrand rose and bowed. The Clerk at the table then read the report of Mr. Ferrand's speech. Mr. FERRAND then rose and said, Sir, I owe, in the first place, an apology to this House for having been the unintentional means of taking up so much of its valuable time. Had the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath not taken me unawares the other evening—(Hear, hear)—l should, on reflection, have given him . . the answer which the Honourable Member for Finsbury said ' he would have given. But, Sir, having in the hurry of the moment been induced to reply to the question of the Hon. and Learned Member, lam sorry that I should have been the cause of thus taking up the time of the House. I owe another apology, Sir, to the working-classes in the fac tory districts, that I should have been the means this evening of depriving them of one moment of that sacred time which they were expecting would be em ployed this evening in debating a question of vital impor ance—a question to them of life or death. I hope the House will do me the justice to believe that, if any remarks of mine, either of a public or of a private nature, should have wounded the feelings of any indi vidual, I shall ever be prepared to give that explanation to that individual which one man of honour has a right to expect from another. It appears to me, Sir, that there have been unfounded conclusions arrived at as to what I said in reference to the subject now brought before the I louse. On Monday evening, as far'as my recollection goes, I said to this House, that I believed that every word of mine, as reported in the Times newspaper, which related to the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department and to the Hon. and Learned Member for Beverley was strictly true; but that I would not vouch for them until I had again referred to that paper, and if they were correct, I would come down the following day and fearlessly and boldly, before this House, either avow or disavow them. I redeemed my pledge to , this House. I came down with the full intention of doing so, and so I did. Sir, the House labours under an incorrect impression, when it supposes that I was driven from the House by the rude and unmanly, interruption which was offered me by the Hon. Members opposite—(Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition benches)—or that I fled from_ the charge. the charge which was made against me was that fused language at Leeds affecting those two lion. Gentlemen, and I admitted I had done so. I admit so, for every word in that paper is what I uttered at the Leeds meet ing. When I left this House I adopted a precedent which has been pursued by lion. Members placed under the peculiar circumstances of myself. I retired from the House, considering it would be improper in me, and impertinent towards the House, if I remained one moment longer. Having redeemed my pledge, I left, lest I might be, an impediment to the free discussion of the subject. I have been ordered by the House of Corn-- mons to appear in my seat to-day, and I ,respectfully obeyed the summons, as I will obey every summons or order this House may give me if it is justified in so do ing.—(Laughter.) lam given to understand that if I was prepared in my plaCe this evening to plead guilty t.) the charge, which the Honourable and Learned Gentleman has made against me, that I shall receive a free pardon at his hands—that if I do not plead gliilty the House will then proceed to pass sentence on roe, without even examining an 3 evidence—(Cries of " No, no")—that it will proceed to pass sentence on me without producing any evidence as to the construction ..to be put upon .my words. I hope I shall -be allowed to say one word as to the conduct hitherto pursued by this self-constituted Court of ,Honour. Mr. Speaker—No man, Sir, ever sat in, that chair, who conducted himself with more strict impartiality, more gentlemanly demeanour, or more graceful bearing than yourself.—(Cheers.) But, Sir, in this new office as judge of this self-constituted Court of Honour, you yourself have found the greatest difficulty in acting as an impartial judge. Sir, the other evening, when that common in !ormer applied to me—(Loud cries of " Order, order.") I retract the words, but I will never retract the sentiment. (Partial cheering.) Sir, when that public accuser—(lnterruption)—it is a Parliamentary phrase, and it is ungenerous to attempt to interrupt me. Sir, when that public accuser applied to me the epithet of falsehood the other evening, I declared that the language was ungentlemanly. You called me to order. Sir, when oae of the witnesses in this prose cution read his evidence against me he supported it by engrafting on that evidence a leading article in the Times newspaper.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, the leading men of both political parties in this House attacked me in violent language, Nay, one of them, in language un justifiable, charged me with a crime, Sir, of which he himself was guilty. Is he a fit judge to sit here? I admit that a more noble or generous-hearted man never trod the soil of Britain; but under the excitement of the moment he uttered expressions which were quite unjustifiable.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, the shouts of revenge which issued from the jury were also within your hear ing ; and let the House recollect that the Prime Mi tnhisetseerwaolls, of declared England, in this wh House, I that had by scarcely done so I had deprived it of gratifying itself with a g reat deal of amusement. (Hear, hear , and cheers.) having Sir, as a Member of this House, I protest against these proceedings. In the name of the people of England—(lronical cheers) —I deny your right to try me on this charge—in the name of the people of England I pronounce this self-constituted Court of Honour to be an illegal and an unconstitutional Court ; and, Sir, in the name of the people of England, I refuse to plead at its bar.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and partial cheering.) Sir JAMES GRAHAM said he by no means rose to address the House in answer to the speech of the Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down. But his Honourable Friend the Member for Bever ley had, in distinct terms, denied the accuracy of the charge preferred against him by the Hon. Member for Knaresborough. He (Sir J. Graham) had not given to the House any statement or assurance in reference to the facts relating to the charge, which was then under the consideration of the House, and it was only for that purpose, before he re tired from the House, .that he rose to address them. Now, before the House proceeded further with the consi deration of this subject, they should hear his (Sir J. Graham's statement. The Honourable Gentleman had referred to the authority of this tribunal, and said that he did not come to ask tle opinion of the House as to the accusation. But he (Sir J. Graham), as the accused, was entitled to ask them for their acquittal and justification.—(Hear, hear') He was in a condition to ask for that decision c and he,had a right to state what the answer was, both as to what concerned himself personally' or what concerned the Hon. Member for Beverly. The first charge, in which he alone was concerned, was couched in these few words—that he was a person wbo had taken steps to procure a false report for the purpose of crushing the Hon. Member for Knaresbo rough, and that he afterwards dismissed the poor wretch whom he had used as his degraded and ignominious in strument. He had with the utmost diligence endeavoured to ascertain whether he had had any communication, direct or indirect, with Mr. Mott in reference to the report. He was unable to find any trace of any correspondence with the Assistant-Com missioner. (Loud cheers.) He had- endeavoured to find any trace of communication with the Commis sioners, the central authority, under whose directions the Assistant-Commissioners acted. He could find no trace of any such communication.—(Hear, hear.) With re ference to the report which he had used in that House — (Cheers)—he was most anxious to ascertain whether, although there had been no written communication with the Commissioners, there had been .any verbal commu nication between them in reference to the report. He himself could not recollect that there had been any ; but he had the positive assurance of the Commissioners that there had been no such communication, and there fore he was in a condition to state in his place in the House, as far as any assurance from him could be given, that no direction whatever had issued from him in re ference to the report. He repeated, therefore, that it was an erroneous statement—deliberately adhered to and not now retracted—that he "had used his official ons wh i power t o o bt a i n a f a l se report for the purpose of crush ing the Hon. M em b e r, and that he dismissed the poor man nosmt instrument."—(Hear, e h n a t d . for ear his hear, t i e g r n . m° i nf Ti tahs e y h t ed h innsmogil dismissal r aalv e a b, g yh u e m ha e ih n mo t ol v df e r s e aay necessarytphercrtsoanny in Mr. such 3 ,h u ar. thing denial inogt ta,ss situation was almost on the face of it absurd. He (Sir J. Graham) said most positively that the dis missal of Mr. - Mott was not his dismissal—such dis missal did not rest with him. It was in the power of the Poor-law Commissioners ; and he, again most dis tinctly assured the House that it was not with reference to this transaction that the dismissal of that gentleman took place.—(Sir Robert Peel here whispered to Sir James Graham.) The House would recollect that there had been a reduction of the Assistant Poor-law Com missioners from ten to five, and it was in consequence of this new arrangement that a selection bad taken place, and Mr. Mott was amongst those not retained in his place.—(Cheers.) Now the second charge which, had been brought against him (Sir James Graham) was with reference to the decision of the Nottingham Elec tion Committee, and it assert e d th a t h e h a d used hi s efforts to cause Mr. Walter to be ejected from his seat— that he had felt the necessity of getting rid of that gen tleman, and did not hesitate as to the means of doing so. Now he (Sir J. Graham) must deny that he ever felt the necessity of getting rid of that gentleman at all.—(Laughter and cheers.) Whether that gentleman remained in. the House, was to him (Sir J. Uraham) a matter of the most ierfe c t i n diff erence . B u t t h e allega tion that he had ever, directly or indirectly—in any way or degree whatever, assisted, or wished to assist, in get ing rid of that gentleman —or that he had ever commu. nicated, H with the Chairman o f th e Committee— (Mr. Hogg) in reference to the subject of that,,Commit tee's deliberations—he c ou ld g i ve t h e House the most solemn assurance in the power -of any man to do, that such charge, such, allegation was altogether and utterly unfounded.--(L eid cheers from both sides of the House.) Now he (Sir James Graham) held the privi leges of that House in high regard and respect, and he held freedom, of debate —perfect unfettered freedom Of . debate--in like respect, He knew. not what course, the House proposed to pursue, but before he withdrew he wished to, say, as he before said, that he held the cha racter of a Member of that House as part of the charac ter of the House. And when any one chose to assail the character of a Member of that House as such, and more especially when one of the Ministers of the Crown —he must say that 'he held their highest privilege to be that of perfect fFeedom of speech---(Hear)—and he could conceive hardly any language could be too free when .a serious imputation had to be made—on reason able and fair grounds —upon a public otlicer ; and he could also concede great freedom of speech when an inference from certain known circumstances had to be drawn: But in this - instance the Hon. Member for Knaresborough had not indulged in an • inference from facts, but had made allegati on o f a, fact itself—(Flear) that he (Sir J. Grahanl)- had,in his public and offieial capacity, procured a false return for the pur pose of getting rid 'of an objectionable person. The question more or less submitted to the House was. that such a report was made to this House. Now if any further doubt existed on this matter that doubt might, he thought, be removed upon further inquiry. For the purpose of clearing his own recollection he had referred to the Poor-law Commissioners: A reference might also have been made to Mr. Mott himielf, who was a witness perfectly satisfactory since he had been dismissed by the Commissioners. But he (Sir J. Graham) did not think it would have been proper in his own case to refer to' Mr. Mott, and he had told the. Poor-law Commissioners that it would be a breach of duty on their part to make . that referenee. Still, he was a witness whose testimony would be beyond all doubt, and he might be called by the House itself. The. Hon. Gentleman talked about the rights of Englishmen ; the right of free discussion was an invaluable privilege, but there was also another right which. Englishmen enjoyed as direct as that—the right of a fair defence when accused. 'He said that he'was an accused party ; he was there to ask for a trial and for an acquittal, and he • was quite satisfied that the House would give it to him.—(Loud cheers from both sides of the House.) He was much obliged to th e H ou se for the attention they had paid to this question. Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said, from the general turn of the speech of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, coin bined with his knowledge of the noble' and generous nature he possessed, he was induced to think that they were not at that moment without a prospect of some re lief from -this unpleasant affair. The Hon. Member seemed to think that the House -would not deliberately consider what was the true construction of the expres sions he: had used. He apprehended that he was mis taken in that, .and that, on the contrary, it was on that subject which the majority of the. House 'wished to be satisfied. If he hid had an opportunity earlier, he would have stated that he did not believe then as he did not believe now, and as he would - not believe till he heard the Hon; Member state so in his place, that in those ex pressions -he intended to convey that most offensive meaning which had been attributed to him.—(Hear, hear.) He could not blame the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Bath to the extent that some appeared to blame hini; at the same time, he did sympathise with the Hon. Member for Knaresborough for the surprise to which he had been sebjected. He could 'well understand that a noble mind, being taken by surprise, was unwilling to retract a word in the heat of the moment, and would then adhere to what, on reflection, he would be willing to with draw. -That was the feelingof the Hon. MemberforKnares borough at the moment.' ,He trusted the Howie would pardon him, if he recalled its attention to the expres sions used. fie confessed when he heard the expres • sions read—and he was, not the only person who felt similarly—he thought 'they were not so strong as bad been represented.—(Hear, , • hear.) There were two charges supposed to be made by the Hon. Member. The first charged the Right lion. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) with having procured a false report ; and the second in volved not only the Right Hon. Gentlerrian, but also the Hon. and ••Learned Member for. Beverley, whom that Right Hofi. Gentleman 'had,' it was said; influenced to make an improper 'decision. If they looked to the pas sage from which this was inferred, it would be found that this conclusien wei by no means knecessary one.— (Hear, hear.), He appealed to the H o n. Gentleman, the - Member for Knaresborough, on the subject, because till he heard from him that he meant to charge the Right Hon. Gentleman in the sense of suborning a man know ingly to put On paper that which he knew to be false, he would'not believe it.—(Hear, hear.) His words were that he obtained a " report which was false."—(Hear, hear.) He did not say that 'there were not circum stances which would induce a person to that the charge was not to be taken to its full extent. What he wanted now was to ask the Hon. Member what he Meant, for the words taken by themselves were not so very serious. The passage did not state that the Right. Hon. Gentleman had used his influence to procure a false report, and that the Hon. and Learned Member for Beverley had yielded to it.—(Hear, hear.) He believed he was not misrepresenting the Hon. Member for Knareaboroue,b, when he said that the meaning put upon his words by the Hon. Member for Montrose was not correct. When the accusation was brought forward, the Hon. Member for Knaresborough said he never meant any such thing. Thi s was, no doubt, a very serious matter in two points of view • first, the Hon. Member had brought a cha rge aga i nst a ' Minister of the Crown that he had made a corrupt use of his office and procured a false report. He for one fully acquitted the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath of bringing the subject before • the House, because he thought there would be just groundsairman.fo ars a of a T P w ar o lia m m o e r n e tary inquiry if that chuge could seriousother be made out. Again, there was a charge against an officer of the House for corruption in his duty as l t o h o o k ed purpose on danger of f e tt er i ng the freedom of discussion, which he very ascertainingser iou s theu H . e gese Member mhaauttde,rs there could w a not s the be imagined. Th en, on the for Knaresborough whether he had used the words with the meaning attributed to them, for until he had so he. would not believe it. If he did, at all events the House was bound to acquit the Right Hon. Secretary of State, and the Right. Hon. Member for Beverley, and to state that there was no ground for the charges which had been made against them ; and as to any ulterior measures which it might be deemed advisable 'to adopt, he would not give any opiniow.—(Chears;) • A pause followed, and there were loud cries for Mr. Ferrand. The Hon: Member, however, did not rise in answer to the call. borough Sir ll. hPaEdE not would, na ad a e anys the a lln ns o we . r M t e o m t b h e e rfor a p p Ka l a re t iosu which had just been made to him, assume that he did not mean to address the House. He could, if he thought fit, give an explanation ; but he inferred that it was not the Hon. Gentleman's intention to make any other ob servations in addition to those which he had already ad dressed to the House.--(The Right Honourable Baronet paused for a moment and then proceeded.) It then be came his (Sir R. Peel's) duty to state to the House his impression as to the course Which it would be advisable for the House to pursue. He begged the House to re collect that the office of adviser which he had now assumed was not a voluntary office. In offering his ad vice to the House, he was acting as he had stated the other night, in conformity with established usage. It was necessary, in order to enable the House to come to a decision, that some distinct proposition should be laid before it. The SPEAKER here interrupted the Right Hon. Gentleman, and stated that in conformity with the usages of the House the Hon. Member for Knares borough ought to withdraw. Mr. Ferrand then rose and left the House, and was followed by Sir James. Graham and Mr. Hogg. Mr. P. Borthwick rose and also left the House, amidst shouts of laughter. Sir R. PEEL resumed- - When he had been inter rupted by the Speaker he was stating that he had not assumed to himself'the office of adviser voluntarily, but was acting in conformity with the general rule, which was, that the first Minister of the Crown in that House should submit-to the House a distinct proposition as to the course which it might be deemed advisable to adopt. —(Hear, hear.) He trusted that he had taken no course with regard to this matter which incapacitated him from expressing an opinion as to the affair which had been brought before the notice of the House. He' had thought that it would have been better not to have noticed the observations which had been made by the Hon. Gentleman.--(Hear, hear.) When the subject had been first brought 'forward he had counselled the House not to come to any resolution, but to take an op portunity of considering the matter. The House had acceded to his counsel, and had abstained from further considering the subject until the next day. Aftei th a t lapse of time he had recommended to the House not to consider the address which had been made by the Hon. - Gentleman in the course of his speech, which he had not"concluded, as a final conclusion against him, but to give him an opportunity, after mature consideration, of stating to the House whether he adopted those expres sions—whether he adhered to those charges, or whether he was prepared to substantiate them. The complaint had been brought under the notice of the House by his Hon. Friend the Member fur Beverley, and his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home De• pertinent. They had complained that a charge had been preferred against them of improper conduct, in the one place with respect to official duty, in the other with re spect to judicial duties imposed by the House. Whatever course they took, he trusted they should not try to e - cape from the difficulty by any equivocation as to the nature of those charges. He trusted they should apply , to those charges the principles of common sense, and ' ask themselves this question—what is the imputation which the expressions meant to convey ? It was im- 1 puted to his Right Hon. F r ie n d, i n ex p ress t erms , that he, being Secretary of State, and standing in an official relation to the Poor-law Commissioners, who were in communication with him, that he took steps to procure a report which was, false, merely for the purpose of crushing a Member of the House of Commons. He could not put the construction of the Hon. and Learned- Member who spoke last on those words. Could those expressions mean anything but that the Secretary of State took steps to procure a false report af fecting the character of a Member of the House Commons ? Could *there be any doubt what.: ever upon the plain meaning of his _expressions ? If there were, let them look to the expressions which followed in a subsequent part of the statement. It was there said that the Secretary of State dismissed the poor tool who had been his degraded and ignomi-. nious instrument in fabricatiag, the injurious report. Surely, the charge was not that his Right Hon. Friend had quoted a report whiCh had turned out to be erro neous, but the charge was, that he had made use of his official authority for the purpose of .fabricating, Or pro: curing the fabrication of, a false report, -and that the man wild had made that report WR$ a degraded and ig nominious instrument..- How could he :be degraded and ignominious if there were merely unintentional errors in the report ? What was the charge with respect to the Hon. Member for Beverley. ? •It was said that his Bight Hon. Friend "having an interest* in procuring the ex clusion of Mr. Walter from the Houseof Commons, this Tory Chairman-united with Sir James Graham and the, Government in unseating Mr. Walter." Surely the meaning of that was, that Mr. Hogg acted a corrupt part. Again, it was said, " How happened it that when Mr. Hogg tried to explain away his conduct upon that occasion the whole Government side of_ the House listened with feelings of disgust while he hig gled and haggled in his explanation. If it were merely an erroneous construction of the law, why should there have been disgust? Could disgust bo applied to anything but improper, notorious, and cor rupt conduct ?—(Hear, hear.) That was the construe tion which, applying the principles of common sense, he Faxed to the charges which were contained in these expressions. But if there were no imputation of cor . - rapt motives, what could have been easier, than for the Hon. Member for Knaresborough to have got up in his place, and said—" Although the expressions are correct, yet the constructions you: place upon them are erroneous ; I declare that I entirely ac quit Mr. Hogg of corrupt conduct in his judi cial capacity ; I think his judgment, which had the effect of unseating Mr. Walter, was erroneous, but I never meant to impute to him any deviatien froin his duty." Now, was any such explanation offered by the. Hon. Member ? He said," I adhere to the expressions ; I protest against the tribunal ; I will not disclaim the Intention of.imputing corrupt motives ; the expressions are correct, and I will maintain entire silence as to the construction put upon them." Sir, I don't feel that I am at liberty to explain away the expressions, when all explanation is refused by the Hon. Member who used them.—(Hear, hear.) The charge against .the Secre tary of State was a definite one. It was not likeebarges . which had been preferred against the House of Commons generally—the charges of being influenced by corrupt motives, or.of being guilty .of perjury,—(ilear, hear.) The charge against the Secretary of State, was a definite one : it was that he used the influence of his office for the purpose of procuring a false report. The Hon. Gentle man, in the course of the speech which he had m a d e th a t night, said, the House of Commons wished to visit hini at once with condemnation on account of these expres sions. He (Sir R. 'reel) had looked upon the Hon. Gen tleman as the accused in that ease. —(Hear, hear.) He had thought that the Hon. Gentleman had preferred a charge ; and what he had advised was that the House of Commons should, if the Hon. Gentleman were,prepared to substantiate his charge, immediately appoint a tri bunal by which the charges might be established if they were correct. The House hid heard the statement made by the Honourable Gentleman, and he presumed they would then wish to come to some conclusion. He (Sir R. Peel) considered that the impressions conveyed or implied a charge of corrupt conduct against two Members 'of that House. The complaint had now been formally made, and they' were now called upon to come to some decision upon it.. If the lion. Gentle Man had said that he was prepared 'to substantiate his charge, he (Sir R. N eel) „would have' proposed that a Committee should be appointed to examine into the facts, and re "port them to the House ; but as the Hon. Gentleman had pursued no such course, he thought they were called upon to pronounce their opinion on this matter.—(Hear.) - He thought the House would have inferred, from what he said on the first occasion when he addressed them, that be was unwilling to take any step in establishing a precedent for interference with the expression of opinion in the House, and especially it was the right of Mem bers to question the officha. acts of a Minister. But where the imputation implied corruption, and where the Member declined to substantiate the charge, :the Minis ter had a right to appeal to the House for its opinion. lie would now read the resolutioris which he propoSed to move.—(Hear i hear.) , The 'first resolution referred to the paragraphs of the speech which had 'been . read by the Clerk, and resolved, " fhat in certain expressions in that speech, it was imputed to the Right Hon. Sir James Graham, Bart., that he had taken, steps to procure a re port merely for the purpose of crushuag,.a Member of that House, and had dismissed the poor tool whom he had uied, as the degraded and ignominious instrument in fabriCating the report. That in another passage, in, reference to the Committee appointed to try the petition against the return for the borough of Not tingham in 1842, Sir James Graham bad found it neces-: sary to procure the unseating of John Wilter, Esq., flue Member petitioned against.; and that James Weir He Esq., a Member of. the 11 , mse and of the Committee, aided - Sir James Graham in unseating Mr. Walter."— (Hear, hear.) That was his first resolution, and, in justice to the gentloman upon whom such grave imputations had been cast, he would move, secondly— " That these having been the_ imputations, and William Busfeild Ferrand, Esq., having avowed that he used them, and declined to substantiate the truth of them, this House is of opinion that , the imputations are wholly un founded and calumnious, and have no effect, in the slighest degree, upon the honour and cbaracter of th e Members' to whom they refer."—(J.oud cheers.) lie thought that these resolutions would do justice, and no more, to, the two Honourable Gentlemen who had been assailed. He believed the resolutions to be pre cisely in conformity with the Act—(Cheers)—and he thought that as this matter had been mooted, it was the duty of the House to express its opinion.—(Hear, hear.) He would perhaps now be asked what further proceed ing he would recommend the House to take.—(Hear, hear.) He had looked back to the course which the House had, on former occasions, pursued in matters of this kind, and he found that in some of them the House had proceeded to 'vote that the charges complained of in volved a breach of privilege.. He (Sir R. Peel) was un willing to follow such a precedent.—(Cheers.) One of the present charges was against a Minister of the Crown for acts asserted to be done in his official capacity ; and, in his opinion, they should not go further than declaring them to bemnfounded and calumnious, for he foresaw difficulty on future occasions in proceeding to make it a ' breach of privilege.--(llear. hear.) He recollected the case where he was himself charged by the late Mr. Cohbett with a serious offence.. He was not a Minister of the Crown, but 'he was a Member of that House, and Mr. Cobbett called upon the House to address the Crown to dismiss him (Sir Robert Peel) from the Privy Council; for being guilty of con duct alleged by him to' be disgraceful. The House heard that charge, which however did not appear to make a very deep impression upon it, for it had ordered the re solutions put by Mr. Cobbett upon the Order Book to be expunged from the records of the House, and that by a majority of two or three hundred .to. four. l-,—(Hear.) The House had thought that an ample vindication of his (Sir Robert Peel's) honour, and a sufficient consolation to him under his misfortunes—(A laugh)—and he was, therefore, perfectly content. That however was the whole of the proceeding in his case._ "Another case was when Mr. Tierney brought , charges of partiality against Mr. Abbott, then Speaker of the House; when a resolution, moved by Mr. Canning, was passed, that the House tip proved of the conduct of the Speaker, and gave no cre dit to the charges brought against him. They rested satisfied with that resolution, and adopted no other af terwards. He • (Sir.R. Peel) -believed it was infinitely , better in matters of this kind to abide` by an honourable acquittal of the' parties charged, and not to enter into unnecessary contests with individuals.—(Cheers.) Jus tice would be 'perfectly satiSfied by this course—a course which he had suggested on his own judgment, and with out consultation or co-operation with any one. If any other Hon. Gentleman had another course to suggest, of course he was at perfect liberty to do so, and to take the opinion of the. House up= it.--:(Hear,. hear.) It was of great importance that they should' be unanimous.— (Hear.) He. hoped that after the declarations which they had heard from individual Members, the almost unanimous support of the,Heuse would betonceded to the course proposed: ": The SPEAICER was abut to put the resolutions. When Mr. T. DUNCOMB F t and said he wished to say a few .words before. the question was put. He did,not understand thellon. Member for Xnaresborough to say that he could ,not._ substantiate the charges, and he thought it would be only fair to tall the Hon. Gentleman in again, •and give- him an -opportunity of stating whe ther he could or not.—(Cries of " Ne, n 0.",) What he had understood the Hon. ,Member' to say was,. that he had no further . statement 'to make 'to the"Holise; Sit ROBERT PEEL.' thought it was. sofficiently ob vious that the Hon. Gentleman was :not prepared to sub stantiate the charges,before that,House„ which was the proper tribunal. His : o°M:hiding. words were that he would offer no explanatiOn excepts out of that,House, a phrase which be (Sir R. Peel) did not : understand ; but the. Hon. Member said he. protested altogether against that tribunal. The question was then put., Mr, FITZSTEPHEN , FRENCH said it appeared to him that the Right, Hon.: Baronet had not completely stated die case. He omitted to state that the Hen. Member for Knaresbornugh had denied that he meant to impute any corrupt. tamperiog: ..He,distinctly denied " that he made any such imputation. lite:deprecated the courseliursued by theillon..Member,,butoia he thought the House would be acting most inconsistently if they •. pursued , the course - suggested; he Avould,. in 'accordance with that opinion, move the following' resolution:— "That, inasmuch as the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies did on a &miner Occasion in his place in. --Par liament,' colleagues." (Cries of accuse his former _ Oh, oh," from the- Opposition side of the 'Flotte.) He should not, be deterred from proceeding by th ese . , ,ing ityoulc . l; eny gtve, him signs . of dislike s qr the trouble of reading the resolution a se6ori time. Hon. Member proceeded—" of introducing measures for the consideration of Parliament which involved in famous tricks and low thimble-rigging, and as that Noble Lord had offered no apology or explanation, and inasmuch as the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury had, in the course of the debate on a former occasion, accused Mr. Cobden of exciting to the horrible crime of assas,ination, and made no satisfactory explanation or apology, it is not, therefore, .expedient or fitting for this House to discuss any further the lan guage used by the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, which was supposed to reflect upon the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Hon. Member for Beverley, particularly as the words complained of were not used in that House," The resolution, having no seconder, fell to the ground. The SPEAKER then put the original motion, which was carried unanimously. Lord JOHN MANNERS wished to say a few words on the resolutions ; bat was told by the Speaker that it was then too late,as the resolutions had been assented to by the House. THE FACTORY BILL. On the motion that the House go into Committee on the Factory Bill, Mr. T. DUNCOMBE rose to move that the order for committing the Factories Bill (No. 2) to a Committee of , the whole House be discharged, for the purpose of committing the Bill to a Select Committee. The first few sentences of the Hon. Member were scarcely audible on account of the rush of Members from the Heuse. He asked the House to commit the Bill to a Select Committee, because a very general' misunder standing prevailed among .all classes as to the effect hich " the Ten Hours' Bill" would have on the wages of the operatives. lion. Members in that House enter tained the most opposite and conflicting opinions on the subject, and the working classes in Manchester and other great manufacturing towns were of opinion that, so far from depressing, the Ton Hours' Bill would have the •ellect of raising their wages to a very considerable de cree. The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department presented a. petition, signed by 62 firms in Manchester, in which 30,000 workmen were employed. The petition set ferth that the measure, if car ried, would_ cause a reduction of 15 to 25 per cent. in the wages of workmen. The Right Hon, Baronet himself was of opinion that the. Ten Hours' Bill would reduce the wages of the operatives 18 percent. The Hon. Member for Liskeard thought about 9 per cent. ; and Colonel Torrens, in a pamphlet lately published, considered that the Bill, if passed into a law, would reduce the wages of those to whom it referred 25 per cent. In Sheffield, sixteen of the trades had voluntarily reduced the hours of labour. In some trades the reduction had been from sixteen hours to eleven, in others to ten, and in some to eight hours, accompanied by an increase of wages amounting to 15 per cent, and an increase in the number of hands employed to the amount of one in seven.— (Hear. hear.) Now he did not think that what had taken place in Sheffield might not be expected also to take place at Manchester. They might in Sheffield work twelve hours if they liked, but by combining among themselves, they had carried their deter mination into effect, and the consequence had been to raise their wages, and not to de press them. Trade was not so brisk now in Shef field as it was a year ago, and yet by working fewer hours employment was more general and wages were better. That was not the only evidence he could ad duce. Similar evidence was given before Mr. Sadler's Committee in 1832, which Committee made no report. Now, he wanted to have a report on this point.- It the working men were deluded, they should be disabused. The Hon. Member then read from the evidence taken before the Committee of 1832 an extract from the exami tuition of a Mr. Whiting, a manufacturer,. who said that a Ten Hours' Bill would be of the greatest advantage, and that it would not lower wages. When the people worked the longest hours wages were lowest. Another witness stated his opinion that wages would not remain as they were with a Tea Hours' Bill, that they would rather rise than fall. Mr. David Brook, of Leeds, was of opinion that the masters would gain by regulating the hours of labour, as it would destroy undue competition. The Hon. Gentleman read other extracts to the same effect, and the statement ofMr. Samuel Smith, of Leeds, surgeon, who was of opinion that the reduction of the hours of labour was necessary to the health of the opera tives, and would not lower their wages, but the contrary. Mr. Oastler was examined before that Committee, and gave smiler evidence, which he was willing to repeat, as his opinions were unaltered. Mr. Oastler was of opinion that in the first instance the effect would be to depress wages a little, but that- the masters would he obliged ultimately to raise them. In 1841 there was another Committee ob tained by Lord Ashley, but that Committee, blinked this question altogether, and made no report as to the effect of short hours upon labour.—(Hear, hear.) Now. if the House would consent to a Committee, he should purpose to confine the inquiry to that question alone.— (Hear, hear.) He was told that the Committee would have the effect of hanging up the Bill for a year, but be thought it better for the credit of the House. and for the interest of the operatives, that the Bill should be hung up for a year than that it should pass with a twelve hours' clause.—(Hear, hear.) The operatives, who wished him not to press for the Committee, did so be cause they were led to believe that Lord Ashley would carry his ten hours' clause. But every one in the House knew that there was no chance whatever of that.--(Hear, hear.) He begged the House to have this question of wages decided before it passed the Bill. If the Com mittee was an impartial one he would bow to its deci sion, and he was sure, that if it decided against the opi nions of the operatives, the latter, however disappointed they might be, would submit with more satisfaction than at present. The Committee would put an end to the unprofitable controversy that was going upon the sub ject and bring it to a conclusion satisfactory to the coun try, and beneficial both to capital and labour.—(Hear.) Mr. WARE • said that in giving his support to the motion, it would be expected that he, who had given the strongest opposition to the principle which his lion. Friend supported, should state at the earliest opportunity the reasons for his concurrence. It would not be supposed that he wished to retract the opinions he had expressed, or by a side-wind to get rid of this BilL As to the Noble Lord (Ashley) he gave him full credit for the sincerity of his motives, and it was not too much to ask the same credit for himself.—(Hear, hear.) He approved of limiting the inquiry to this particular point of evidence, which had never been fully examined, and respecting which there was great in difference of opi nion both in the House and the country.—(Hear, hear.) There were reasons both in the House itself, and out of it, which rendered it desirable that a Com mittee should be appointed. Two decisions had taken place in the House opposed to each other, and it would be difficult for the . House to retrace its steps without new ground—(Hear, hear)—and out of the House any retracing of its steps would be attributed to the worst of motives, to the influence of the Government, and a disposition in the House to sacrifice the working classes to party purposes.-- (Hear, hear.) No decision would set the question at rest. He had been himself very severely handled by the Chartist portion of his constituents —(Laughter)—according to the pre diction of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Duncombe) who was in such matters a good prophet.— (Laughter.) He bad told them that one-third of the people of Sheffield thought the ten hours' theory could not be applied to any trade which had to compete with foreigners. They replied that they regarded the regulations of trade as the only , way of preventing monthly gushes and fluctua tions, and to equalise labour, and that in some trades they were working ten hours, in others eight hours, and in some six hours; that wages had risen ; that the middle classes had been benefited, and paupers taken into employment.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Dun combe.) He had now confirmed his Hon. Friend's state ment—let him give the answer.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The system had been in operation only six months, and he would show what had been the effect in foreign trade. He met this morning Mr. Muntz, who asked him, had his constituents all gone mad ? (Laughter.) He answered, not all, but there were some for whose sanity he would not answer.—(Laughter.) Mr. Muntz then told him that he was in the habit of sending to. Sheffield very good orders for the United States. The other day he wrote to them to say that he had a very large order, but he received for answer, that, in consequence of the combination of the workmen, it could not be executed, and the order was accordingly sent to the Continent; and that important trade was most likely lost to Sheffield for ever.--(Hear, hear.) He had re ceived a letter from Sheffield this day (as we under stood) describing the injurious effects which the combi nation had had on foreign trade. A foreigner came over recently, to buy for the Turkish market, but he could not give the prices, and. he went to -Berlin. Certainly the articles were of an inferior kind, but the same heads and hands which could make these articles would not require a seven years' apprenticeship to rival us also in the best. In his opinion, generally speaking, it was not for.that House to interfere m such matters, but rather to leave things to find their own level. But in the present instance he thought it would be productive of the greatest good if the two parties were brought fairly : together, and if they allowed every single suggestion, however ini practicable, to be brought before a Committee for then they would have such a mass • of evidence as milt carry . e conviction to every mind, however much_it t n o.tiew been previously warped or prejudiced. W with that view he should go into Committee ; it was that he should vote for a Comm n i u t t te t e z h i „ at he oar. inions ahead Ward) had altered any one° s u bject in y expressed by him a Committee would classes . between aloo£ . He H ou se. If be might use uP tl n e te rmth a w ff h ord tthlieerme ehadanshoLoofarmpatoriongmnuelotesstatonding believe ore dtbe working lasses , ,were to honest and too just when truths wer e fairly eves satisfied th a t i n a brought before them not ciittt them,ou be r a e n a d dily ile proved that wh e n cap i ta l c at o t in ni mi ce i t tee o" was f e tt e red workmen's wages must suffer. Capital.had too long been stagnant in the country. When he saw two of the largest establishments in t he world deriving no profit from their enormous outlay, he WWI ,aatisfied that intense suffering must find its way among the ope rative classes. There.was the establishment of Messrs. Fielden—the largest in cotton, and that of Messrs. A ckroyd—the largest in woo ll en, which in three _years time had paid no less a sum in - wages than 46%000Z, and they • had simultaneously sent in returns to the ineoute tax.Commissioners, declaring that during that period they had realised no profit. He must say he had too high an opinion of the working classes to think they would entertain the hope of any higher wages being obtained by Legislative enactment, when facts and figures were fairly brought before them. And for these reasons it was that, without abandoning one opinion he had advanced, he now felt it his duty to support the motion for the Committee now sought for. Sir J. GR.AHAM (who was almost inaudible) was understood to say, that be must oppose the motion for a, Committee on this subject more especially as he believed such a step to be inimical to the real interest of the working classes at the present time. In his opinion all Committees or that House ought to_ be lipaitod to the 'discharge of certain functions, which could hardly be the case in this instance, for the Committee would not be gathering facts, but eliciting opinions—a duty . he humbly believed much better assigned to the House itself. Be sides, he knew no instrument of delay so certain as a Select Committee of that House, and in this instance (Sir James G ra h am ) was mos t anx i ous t h at delay, e, h ick answer no useful purpose, should be particularly avoided.--{Hear, hear.) It should be recollected that upon this subject there were antagonistic views strongly entertained and vigorously acted up to, and even the very Hon. Members who proposed and seconded the tau •, tion for a Committee (Mr. Duncombc and Mr: Ward), differed as widely as men could do in their opinions upvis it—(Hear, hear)—and see i ng th a t thi s C omm i ttee wo od be the medium, not of gathering facts—for of. them they had already all that could possibly be obtained—but Qf eliciting opinions, which it was the province of the Hou se itself to strive at, he could see no good whatever, hit rather much of evil, were the motion agreed to. Of in!- • formation they had a vast quantity, and that of the most.. elaborate character. Since 1832 they had.had Comwi'- tees that had taken the fullest evidence that could •be brought to bear upon the subject ; and the . Cotonittee now moved for was not for the particular question on which parties differed—it was not for the effect. of a reduction of wages coincident on the reduction of she hours of labour. The motion was to refer the Bill it,eif to a Committee.. Mr. DUNCOMBE said that was preliminary only to the consideration of the question of the reduction of wages consequent on the reduction of the hours Uf labour. _ fir J. GRAHAM resumed—That might be a very important point, taken as a substantive measure, toe consideration, but it was not so brought forward now. The motion now was to refer the Bill to a Select Com:- . mittee, and to that he (Sir J. Graham) had the strongest possible objection. Why, in the Committee of 1840, of which Lord Ashley was the Chairman, the subject; factories aud factory labour had been gone into at le great length—all the leading points had been gone jute,. with the exception of the limitation of wages (as wit. understood the Right Hon. Baronet), and this qttesti, ii had been excluded, and wisely excluded, by that. Nehe Lord himself. It was very well known --riot as mato c of opinion, but as matter of fact—that a limitaion of Cie hours of labour must lead to a reduction of wages eqai valent to the saving of the raw material consequent :on the reduction of time. The loss must be compensated either by a reduction of profit or by a loss on mlees. But that was not a question to be raised before .a Coei mittee, for the facts were not disputed. For the third time they had arrived at the Committee on a Bill con taining provisions which had been much sought for by the operatives themselves, which had been much desired by them, which were founded on most excelh nt autho ritee.; and seeing that the measure was ripe for diseuseioa by the House, seeing that the operatives tle-melves sort not petitions for a Committee, he earnestly entreated the House not to entertain the proposition of the Hen. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Duncombe), but to allow the Speaker to leave the chair.—(Hear.) Sir G. STRICKLAND said he must oppese the motion for a Committee, as it appeared to him that the result 4e* sending the Bill up stairs would be to get rid of it for the present session. He, for one, was most anxious that this should not be the result of their proceedings on this question, as he looked upon the provisions of the Bill as extremely important—even without a Ten or. Elew Hour Bill—for either of which he was most anxious. He thought no further. delay whatever should take place. He had been a member of Committees upon this sub ject, and he could truly say the subject had been most; fully discussed, and there was no necessity whatever fur further information. The particular question now mooted rested upon opinion, and if they were t o se t a b ou t as ki ng opinions, their lab ours would be no further advanced at the end of six months than they were now. He had listened very attentively to the Hon. Gentleman who had brought forward the motion (Mr. Duncombe), and he could only come to the conclusion that not one of the subjects brought. forward by him had any referenze whatever to the matter. What it was for them in tiviit House to do, was to consider the means of bettering the condition of persons employed in factories, and to extend suitable protection to women and children. This was what they had to set about ; and with this view of the case, he trusted the House would not concede to the Hon. Gentleman the Committee he had asked for. Mr. HUME said that no man in that House or out of it regretted more than he did that any person, male 4sr female, should be compelled, by circumstances, to wot k more than ten hours a day. But the country was not now in a condition to select what should be the exact number of hours an individual should work, for we were placed in direct and absolute competition with the labour market of the world. The only correct principle fez them to try to act upon, in order.to better the condition of the people, to lighten their labour, and add to their wages, was to extend the market, to widen the field. for employ. The question was, whether their interference would not add to the existing evil—want of employment. He knew of no question affecting the working classes more important than some which had already been settled in Committee, and he could not at all admit that this was not a fair case for such an inquiry. A Committee had formerly been appointed to examiee into the rate of labour and the hours of employment, and so satisfactorily did the evidence bear out his views, that the Committee came to a unanimous decisi, against interference. At that time the working clasees laboured under the greatest delusion, and attempts were now being made to mislead them. The Noble Lord had worked on the passions of that House, and had thereby hurried the House into a hasty decision. A Committee , would come to a different result ' • and it was for that reason that he wished to see a Committee appointed. If England were the onlymanufacturing country, it might be all very well to li mit, competition ; but a very different state of things in reality existed. In stead of being checked or injured, all possible assist ance should be given to our manufacturing interests . If the House interfered with labour, let them apply the principle of interference to all classes. The cotton ma nufacture formed but a small branch of the industry ..f the country. The delusion of the poor people was that they would receive twelve hours' wages for ten hours' labour. In order to correct that mistake, a Committee should be appointed to investigate the matter, cub then he had no fear for the result. He thought it his; duty to support the proposal of his Hon. Friend, in or der that no delusion might induce them hastily to pass a measure which would have an injurious effect on the public interests. Mr. ESCOTT was surprised that the Hon. Member should imagine that the working classes expected to be paid the same amount of wages for a less amount of work.- - -(Hear, hear.) He did not believe that any per son was under that delusion ; the fallacy was one which did not need the appointment of a Committee in order to correct it. He should vote against the motion, be cause he believed it to be grounded on an entire fal lacy.—(Hear.) Mr. G. PALMER had not supported the proposal of the Noble Lord to establish the period of teu hours as the legal period of labour. If interference was ne cessary at all, and he thought the Noble Lord had mad& out that it was, he could see no reason for the proposed delay. The sense of the country was now, however,, so fully ascertained in reference to this matter, that he , thought it might safely be left to the manufacturers themselves. He would vote with her Majesty's Govern ment for going into Committee. Mr. VILLIERS said, that if any proof were necessary to show that caution ought to be used in legislating upen this subject, it would be found in the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. The Hon. Gentle man said they attached too much importance to the fo reign trade, for, said he, only 400,000 persons are en gaged in it. That showed the extent of the information, possessed on the subject by not the youngest Member of the House.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he undertook to. say, that 1,500,000 persons were employed in the cottons trade alone.—(Hear, hear.) He would venture to say that four millions were dependent on the foreign trade of the country.—(Hear, hear.) He knew the Hoe. Gentleman belonged to a school which thought that it ought 4to be limited. Did the Honourable Gentlereau calculate what the effects of that would be. The people who left the . agricultural_districts for the manufacturing localities would be thrown back, and the poor-rates would be greatly augmented. The. question wasenugli: there to be a Committee of Inquiry. He thought tea was a reasonable request. It was said that the working classes and the master manufacturers were in favour f the Bill. Had the working elesses—had the master.e "0"_. nufacturers sought this Bill ? .The Eon. , lefemo t_ r n r . Finsbury said thee .the Bill as it stood, .wit h ou t hours' Bill that a Ten could! hear.) He was well aware He did not see the ra -- hours' clause, the working classes did not nsnt. (neer,: not be carried.—(Hear, headr.)b the truth there's layed it to satisfy themselves cessity for pressing forwar ofte measure. If the- i e .. not be much mischief in that. .e said they 14, emu/ en=- quiry. It was said that a Committee was of no import- • ance except to ascertain matter of fact. That was ales) se the stoc k ;argu ment brought forward when inquiry w a s to bSerefused. He had no great opinion of Committees. ues e ei4 that House, but he thought they might be of as muc h, n e g o b llec y t:ng wh o o pini wu ons a as stAt faC un t ch s. supporter of o Me mb er a e n for Finsbury, Hours' Bill, said he did not think this measure would be nefit the working classes. Could anybody then say there was not a doubt upon the ;subject? It had beets said at meetings held on the subject, that wages were low enough; but one of the necessary consequences of pin ing this measure would be t o : reduce wages.—(Hear, hear.) Their only object in passing a ten hours' clause would be to raise the condition of the working classee. Would it not be wise to inquire whether it would benefit them if-their wages were reduced?--(llear. hear.) It ha S been said during this debate by gentlemen opposite ti at they lived in times when they must interfere, and wl L en there must be constant intervention between the empli evert and employed. They would not confine themselves,_tolle tories, but would interfere with the, relations of -iurts'.er and servant in every departnient.--(Hear, hirer.) If they only wanted thee truth, whyshouldthey *be tt7raid of inquiry. Same of the muter mataufaotir ; era wa re in favour of the Ten hours' Bill, because tbe e y thought it would destroy the. competition of the 'lama raanufac turers.—(llear' hear.) The worktv, classes were in favour of it, b ecause they thought teY 3 one-sixth more mills would be erected throughoet' the country—that was, that the competition woulrY be increased. Thre large master manu fac turers weree''in favour of the clause for one reason, the workiwe e"etisses for the very oppo site.—(Hear, hear-) eriticd troth be right ?—(llear, hear.) Some of these 'must , be -wrong. The adult work ing men thought_ *lslet if 'females and children were w withdrawn their ages would be increased. That was a delusion., and - for this reason, that unskilled labour would not obtain the wages of skilled labour.—(Hear, hear.) They had no reason to suppose that the working men, if they did not labour under, a delusion, would ask: for that which' would injure th4n instead of benefiting them. The Hon. Member for Fiiisbury was not afraid of meddling witlethe capital of th ee . ountry. He was confident the working classes could not t istablish their- case, that a reduction Of wages would 'not fi Alcver from a diminution of the hours'of labour. He (Mr.„ V illiers) did not think they could make out that. -He I ine w - the miserable con dition of millions of the people,; and be was, therefore,. for inquiry. --- (Hear, hear.) rfe -would vote for a Tent Hours Bill if he thought the condition of the w 'orking classes would be improved titer ,ebs, and that thtt'a• wag , sti