The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-21 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 20. The LCRD CHANCELLOR took kis seat on the Woolsack shortly after Five o'clock. MEDICAL REFORM. The Earl of DEVON presented a petition from the medical practitioners of Exeter against the Medical Re form Bill. NEWSPAPERS. Lord CAMPLELL presented a petition, as we un derstood, from an individual residing in Montgomery, relative to the conveyance of newspapers by the General Post-office. The Noble and Learned Lord regretted that his Noble Friend at the head of the Post-office was not present, as he considered the petition well worthy the attention of the Government. The grievance the petitioner complained of was, that the postmasters in London,in the receiving- house;for letters in the metropolis seemed to think they had a right to abstract newspapers for their own use or that of their friends. The letter receivers seemed to think they had a right to take tithe of newspapers from all persons who sent them to their friends. The consequence was, that newspapers that were sent seldom arrived. The petitioner stated this to be a great grievance, and a gross breach of duty on the part of the Post-office receivers. The petitioner sug gested that a return should be made of the different com plaints that had been brought forward on the subject. It was his intention to move for a return to that effect. , The Duke of XV ELLINGTON—The Noble and Learned Lord I h , i , e will move it to-morrow, as the Noble Lord at the head of the Post-office is not present. Lord CAMPBELL acceeded to the proposition of the Noble Duke, and gave notice that he would to-morrow move for a return of the number of applications made during the last twelvemonths to the General Post-office, complaining of the miscarriage of newspapers. The LORD CHANCELLOR laid a Bill on the table allowing bail in error in cases of misdemeanour. NEW HOUSE OF PEERS. Lord CAMPBELL, seeing the Noble Lord the Presi dent of the Council in his place, would ask him what prospect there was of their getting speedy possession of their new chamber. The present was the eleventh session since the new Houses were begun, and he (Lord Camp bell) did not find that they made much progress yet. He (Lord Campbell) had sat on that bench (pointing- to one of the cross benches) for six hours and a half on a late day, and he could assure Nob'e Lords that he felt the inconveniences of the building very greatly. The. house was exceedingly old and exceedingly inconvenient, and therefore it was that he asked the Noble Lord if it WAS likely that they would soon enter into possession of the new chamber? Lord BROUGHAM would add his testimony to that of his Noble Friend. There was nothing to qualify the inconveniences of the House during the day sittings, excepting, perhaps, the pleasure of hearing the Learned Counsel engaged in the causes before their Lordships. The LORD CHANCELLOR had, as well as his Noble Friends who had spoken on this subject, sat for six hours to bear causes, and he did not feel the great inconveniences complained of. It might be that he was somewhat warmer clothed than the Noble and Learned Lord (Brougham), and therefore did not suffer in the same degree.—(Great laughter.) Lotd WHARNCLIFFE said there was not much probability of their Lordships having the use of the House during this session. The roofing, he believed, was partly finished, but he would undertake to make some inquiries upon the subject. Lord REDESDALE said, if it would give any satis faction to the Noble Lord, he could inform him that not only was Cie evernal roofing finished, but the interior was also ready to be put up at any moment, and he had no doubt that the whole would be in a condition to be occupied at the beginning of the next session. ADMISSION OF CATHOLIC STUDENTS TO TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN. Lord STR ANGFORD gave notice that, on a future day, he would move for a return of the nnmber of per sons professing the Roman Catholic religion entered at Trinity College, Dublin, in the years from 1629 to 1844 inclusive. In answer to a question from a NOBLE LORD as to the time occupied by tue railway department of the Board of Trsdc in the consider3tion of railway projects, Lord DALHOUSIE declined to give the required in formation. He requested their Lordships not to express any opinion as to the conduct of that department until after the report of their proceedings had been laid upon the table. Their Lordships were aware that not less than two hundred and forty-eight projects had come be fore them, and they bad been constantly engaged in the consideration of them. When the labours of the department were seen, then, indeed, if it were proved that they had done nothing, it would Fa time enough to visit them with displeasure, but in the meantime he prayed them to defer expressing any opinion till that report should be furnished. The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 20. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. RAILWAY BILLS. Petitions were presented for the Cockermouth and Workington Railway Bill; the Kendal and Windermere Railway Bill; and the Manchester and Buxton Railway Bill. Petitions were presented against the Glasgow Junc tion Railway Bill, and the Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway Bill. A report was brought up that the Committee recom mended that the standing orders should be dispensed with in respect to the London and York Railway; and also that the standing orders h d been complied with in the case of the Pontefract and Goole Railway. MANCHESTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY BILL. This Bill was read a first time. MEDICAL REEORM BILL. Mr. VERNON HARCOURT presented a petition praying that the Medical Reform Bill might not be pro reeded with. SALE OF LIQUORS ON THE SABBATH. 111 r. BROTHERTON presented a petition from the Manchester Temperance Society, and also one from Akh bourne, in Derbyshire.; pra, ing the House to take mea sures for preventing the sale of intoxicating liquors on the Sabbath. IRISH POLICE FORCE. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Mr. Henry O'Connell, complaining that he had been unjustly dis charged from his situation in ;he Irish police force, and praying for compensation for the same. C II URC H-RATES. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Mr. William Bidwell, of the parish of St. Botolph, Cambridge, com plaining that he had been involved in expensive litiga tion' for not paying church-rates, and praying for relief under the circumstances. The Ilon. Member gave notice that he should move that the petition which he had just presented be printed with the votes. RAILWAY SPECULATIONS IN IRELAND. Mr. P. BUTLER presented a petition signed by several persons in London who were anxious to invest capital in Ireland, in favour of the Kilkenny and Waterford Rail way by Carrick-on-Suir ; and a second petition from Kilkenny, in favour of the same line, signed by the sheriff, under-sheriff and principal inhabitants of that city. CHESHIRE AND BIRKENHEAD RAILWAY. Mr. TOLLENIACIIE brought 'up 'the report on the Cheshire and Birkenhead Railway, and reported that the standing orders had been complied with. WIN DOW -TAX. Lord DUNCAN presented a petition, signed by Dr. Southwood Smith, Dr. Liston, Dr. Harvey, and others of the principal medical practitioners in London, to the number of 91, praying the House to take into con sideration the physical and moral evils induced by defective ventilation in dwelling-houses. The pe titioners stated that houses were thus badly constructed by the landlords, in order to avoid payment of the window-tax, and they prayed the House therefore to remit the tax altogether. LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY. _ _ An HON. MEMBER brought in this Bill, which was read the first time. 'I'HE INCOME-TAX. Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition from the inhabitants of Plymouth mgainst the income-tax. TRENT VALLEY RAILWAY. _ _ Mr. MARK riiirdiAtis presented a petition from the Trent Valley Railway Company, for leave to bring in a Bill for making a Trent Valley line of rail. Mr. EwAnT, in consequence of the business intend( d to be brought on to- night, postponed, till this day fort night, his motion standing on the paper for leave to bring in two Bills : one to enable towns councils to establish museums of art in •:orporate towns ; the other for en abling the defendant's counsel in civil, and the prisoner's counsel in criminal, cases to address the jury on the close of the evidence for the prisoner or defendant. NAVY ESTIMATES. _ _ Sir C. NAPliiiga'Ve notice that he would move, on the question being put for the louse going into Com mittee on the navy estimates, that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that a CoMmission might be appointed to inquire into the state of the navy and the defences of the dockyards. ART-UNIONS. Mr. WYSE gaven()tic;()flii;intention, on a future day, to revive his moti',n for the appointment of a Select ComMittee on Art-uni.'nC.• TI!I CORN-LAWS. Mr. COBDEN gaN e notice of his intention, on a future day, to move tor a Committee to inquire into the operations of the corn-laws on tenant•farmers. RAILWAYS. Mr. 'WALLACE gave notice, that on the 6th March he would call the attention of the House to the existing traffic on railways, and the regulations respecting third class trains ; and that he would move an address to her Majesty for the appointment of a Royal Commission, to inquire into the state of railway travelling in Great Bri tain and Ireland, and the best means of improving the system. l a liDO no W ti e 'r e that, AX. in Lord DUNCAN I‘ ;v e the discussion with which th e House wa s consequence of specting the financial measures of the Rig h occupied re net the First Lord of the Treasury, would het Hen. Barn the motion of which he had givin n otice p os tp one respectin g window duties to Woluesday, the 27th inst. the LORD ELLENBOROUGH'S RECAL. Mr. HUME gave notice that, on this day fortnight, he would move for copies of the correspondence which bas taken place between her Majesty's Govern ment and the Directors of the East India Company, re lating to the 11 cal of Lord Elleiiborough; and he would move also for the minute of the Directors recalling the Noble Lord. NEwspApx it STEAM COMMUNICATION IN IN DIA. it JOHN HOBHOUSE, seeing the Right Hon. -,--:, .-1.&1 5 V7. \eNtlen3an the Secretary of the Board of Control in his --- k,A,,,t..‘ e, would - take the liberty-of asking him whether the (Pr :; . :_i, f t : ~/. \:.- ,:,..,.., „unication between Madras and Calcutta twice a *I : .',' - c' _. , , th was continued, and whether it was intended to k s _, '1 , 1) .he end the same facilities of communication to Bombay ? 7 ' 4 - -. -+lii---. : Ire : . /4 , c. E. TENNENT said that her Majesty's Govern- N- a. le ment did not deem the post of sufficient importance to _ justify any present alteration. HARBOUR OF PORT PATRICK. Mr. WALLACE; gave notice that he would to morrow inquire whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to grant any sum of money for improving the harbour of Port Patrick. MEDICAL REFORM BILL. Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from the medical practitioners of the town of Sheffield against the proposed Medical Reform Bill. BURDENS ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. G. BANKES begged to ask the Hon. Member op posite (Mr. Ward), in respect to his motion for inquiry into the burdens that press on agriculture, whether he would have any objection to postpone his motion for the present ? The reason he asked the question was, that when the details of the financial question came on, it was likely that several amendments would be proposed which would give rise to discussions upon the subject that would answer all the purposes of the Hon. Member's motion, and the same object would be thus attained. Mr. WARD said that his only object, in the motion of which he had given notice, was to afford her. Ma jesty's Ministers an opportunity of proving their case fully and fairly; he could not, therefore, comply with the Hon. Member's request. Mr. BANKES thought that, perhaps,' he had not been sufficiently explicit. He should have stated that the surplus to be derived from the saving in the auction duties, could be applied in mitigating the burdens that press on agriculture.—(Cries of " Oh !" and laughter.) EMPLOYMENT IN WORKHOUSES. Captain PECHELL begged to ssy, in reference to his motion on the subject of the employment of the poor in union workhouses, that the guardian* of the Boston Union had refused to comply with the order of that House. He, therefore, begged to ask what course the Right Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary intended to take in reference to those guardians; and also what direc tions, if any, had been given to prevent the crushing of bones in workhouses? . Sir JAMES GRAHAM said the Hon. Gentleman had not given him notice of the question he intended to put, respecting the Boston Union guardians, who had refused to comply with the orders of that House. As far as the Poor-law Commissioners were concerned they had done all in their power to enforce the orders of that House. It bad, however, been found impossible to compel com pliance, and it would, therefore, be for the House to take some steps upon it. He (Sir James Graham) had always condemned the practice of crushing bones by manual labour, but objectionable as the practice %as admitted to be, it did not come within the operation of the law. In answer to a question from Mr. BARNABY, Sir JAMES GRAHAM said it was his intention on an early day to ask leave to bring in a Bill to settle the law with respect to orders of magistrates in bastardy cases. This Bill had been rendered necessary by a recent decision of a Learned Judge, who had held that the orders of magistrates were at present illegal. ITALIAN REFUGEES. Sir CHARLES NAPIER wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite with respect to a statement which he had made the other night regarding the two sons of Admiral Bandiera, and twenty other in dividuals. The Right Hon. Baronet had stated that in the expedition in which these individuals had been en gaged, the Governor of the lonian Islands and the Go vernment at home had been taken by surprise. Ile wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether any re port was made to the Government at home of the cir cumstances, and whether any instructions were given by the Home Government to the Governor of the lonian Islands us to bow he was to act ? lie wished to know whether any instructions had been given by the Governor of these islands to prevent them from landing. If Lord Seaton had acted a humane part, instead of sending a communication to the Neapolitan Gevernment, he should have sent the steamer to acquaint those twenty-two unfortunate individuals and apprise them of their danger. He wished to know whether the Governor had represented to the two Bandiera, and twenty others that they had communicated with the Government what he knew of their intentions ? Sir R. PEEL said he had stated all he knew of this matter the previous evening; but, for the satisfaction of the Gallant Officer, he would endeavour to answer his question. No communication had been made by Lord Seaton to the Neapolitan Government, respecting the in tended landing of these 22 individuals until after they had sailed. He did not recollect that Lord Seaton had made any communication to the British Government of the arrival of these individuals to the British Govern ment on the Friday after their departure. Lord Seaton stated to the Neapolitan officer that one of the Ban deira had arrived in the lonian Islands in the month of February ; that he then went to Malta, and subse quently returned to the lonian Islands, and then he had conducted himself there in a manner not to excite any suspicion whatever ; that on the 12th, when they sailed, the Governor did not suspect their intentions, because they left unarmed. On the 13th the Consuls applied to Lord Stilton fur an armed steamer to apprehend these people. The Consuls that applied to him were the Aus trian Consul, the Russian Consul, and the Consul for the Papal States. An HoN. MEMBER (on the Opposition side of the House)—The Neapolitan Consul. Sir R. PEEL—WeII, I am stating to the best of my recollection, and if I be incorrect, I will state to morrow evening in what respect I am so. I have not now the papers by me. Lord Seaton distinctly stated, when remonstrated with, that he considered those reports very much exag4erated, and that he could not think that it was the intention of those people to land on the coast of Calabria. Sir C. NAPIER said that valet he wished to know was, whether Lord Seaton had communicated t 9 the Bandieras, after he had received the remonstrances of the Consuls, so as to warn them of the danger which they were incurring by attempting to land on the coast of Calabria? Sir R. PEEL said that about ten o'clock in the even ing of the 12th of June the Bardieras had sailed from Corfu, and that Lord Seaton had not previously had the least conception that it was their intention to sail from the island. On the 13th the Consuls had made their re presentations alluded to. The Hon. and Gallant Officer asked if Lord Seaton had made any communication to the Bandieras. Now, it was impossible that he could have made any communication to them before they sailed, because he had entertained no suspicion whatever of their intention to leave the island. If the Hon. and Gallant Officer intended to ask whether Lord Seaton had sent a boat after them to make a communication to them on the subject, the reply was, that most cer tainly Lord Seaton had not. Lord J. RUSSELL observed that the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet was, that twenty of these indivi duals had sailed in two boats from the island of Corfu. Now, it had been stated in the public newspapers that a letter had been written by one of the Bandieras the day before his death, in which he stated that the per son on horseback, who accompanied them from the island of Corfu, was the person who had betrayed them to the Neapolitan Government. Now he asked if that person had held any communication either with Lord Seaton, or with any person in connexion with the Bri tish Government, on that subject? Sir R. PEEL would state to the Noble Lord to-mor row. He would have been perfectly willing to state to the Noble Lord to-day if he had had notice of the ques tion. Perhaps the Noble Lord would be kind enough to repeat the question to-morrow. Mr. MONCKTON MILNES asked if there was any objection to lay before the House some portion of the papers connected with this subject.—(Cries of ‘• All. all," and cheers.) It was a matter that had created an in • tense interest throughout the country, and the country would not be satisfied without further information. Sir R. PEEL was not aware whether or not the corre spondence contained matters which would render it in expedient to produce the whole of it. He had no objection whatever to lay before the House the substance of it, but it could not be expected that he could pledge himself to produce the whole of the corre spondence ithout having carefully perused the dispatches of Lord Seaton. He thought the House would consent to give him time to answer the question ; but he would at once state that no communication had been made from the British Government to the Neapolitan Government, and that no communication had been received from Lord Seaton respecting the Bandieras, until after they had sailed. The first communication from a foreign Power, which the British Government had received on the subject, was a letter from Vienna, dated the 26th of July, containing a remonstrance against our having permitted that expedition. On receiving that intimation they called . upon Lord Seaton for a further report, and they received from him two letters exactly in conformity with what had been stated. Mr. S. W. HOPE said he might also state, from hav ing been in possession of the correspondence, that the Government had received no notice whatever, and on further search he had not been able to find any, of the arrival of the Bandieras in the lonian Islands ; the cnly notice of their being there was an application from the Austrian Government to have them delivered up as deserters from the Austrian naval ser vice, which there was no power or wish on the part of the Government to do. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE—Did the Austrian Government give you any notice of the Bandieras being in Corfu ? Mr. HOPE said the Government received no notice whatever. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE—Why, it was in Mazzini's letters !—(Great laughter.) Mr. S CRAWFORD asked if was the intention of the Government to bring in this session a measure on the subject of the law of landlord and tenant in Ireland. He would give notice of the question for Monday next, if it would suit the convenienceof the Right Hon. Gentleman. Sir R. PEEL said the evidence taken by the Landlord and Tenant Commission was being prepared with every expedition, and before he answered the question of the Hon. Gentleman on the part of the Government, it would be necessary that he should see that evidence. Mr. S. CRAWFORD had no wish to press the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he would postpone his question to a future day in consequence of what had fallen from him. THE SMOKE NUISANCE. Mr. MACKINNON rose , to bring forward a subject . of great importance to the, country, particularly in the manufacturing districts. He was happy to say that, of the many Hon. Gentlemen opposite connected with the manufacturing interest, not one had opposed the measures he was about to introduce. He now moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the prevention of the nuisance of smoke arising from the furnaces of factories. On the question being put, BRIGHT said the inhabitants of the manufac turing districts ought undoubtedly to feel obliged to the Hon. Member for Lymington for the extraordinary care which he to:,k to secure for them pure atmosphere ; but, hethbeelipeuvrpedostehaftorthwishßicihil it wouldwas be u a t t te t r h ly e sa u rn se e les t s irue fo , for &nee liable to penslty if opaque an o in tended. The Hon. Member's Billoufe smoke last sessiownermeadseeeint "P' THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 21 1845. issuing from a factory chimney more than so many minutes in a certain number of hours. Now, in the pre mises with which he was connected there were three distinct mills and three distinct sets of boilers or fur naces, and the smoke from the whole of these escaped by one chimney. It would be impossible for the police to tell whose fault it was that opaque smoke was seen issuing forth in the case to which he referred. The House had often proved it self quite unable to manage such affairs, awl he be lieved that all attempts to remedy the evil by means of legislation would _be fruitless. He assured the Hon. Member that there was not a single clause of his Bill of. last session which he could not have set at nought with the most perfect impunity. The Hon. Gentleman was, he believed, in the habit of visiting a near relative of his, who resided in a manu facturing district, and he might have thought that the smoke from these chimneys was a nuisance. But his near relative with his horses and his hounds, and all the absurdities which arose from that system — (Laughter) well, that was apart from the subject altogether, and he would not pursue it.—(Hear, hear.) He had no desire to interfere with the Hon. Gentleman, but he thought it would save a great deal of time to the House if leave were not given to bring in the Bill. He would advise the Hon. Gen tleman to consult practical men before he took the sub- ject in hand. Mr. FERRAND said that two days ago he was speak ing to a very large manufacturer in Yorkshire, and who , was also a member of the Anti-Corn-law League, and he told him (Mr. Ferrand) that he burned his own smoke ; that it was easy to be accomplished, and asked him to use his exertions in Parliament to compel every manufacturer to do the same. Sir. J. GUEST thought it was impossible to get rid of smoke altogether. Mr. RICARDO said he would give every opposition to the Bill. Mr. MILNES said that he attended a meeting at Leeds, which was attended by every respectable inha bitant, and there was net a single objection made to the propriety of making some such attempts as that made by the Honourable Member near him. Any person who inspected the magnificent works of his esteemed friend, Mr. Marshall, of Leeds, might see how efficiently this nuisance might be abated. The House would do well to apply itself to get rid of what must be allowed to be a great nuisance, not merely with regard to taste or appearance, but with regard -to its injurious effects on the health of the inhabitants of the manufacturing districts.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. P. BORTHWICK said that the Hon. Gentleman opposite said that scientific and practical men should be examined before any Bill was brought in on the sub ject. Now, the fact was, that scientific and practical men had been examined before the Committee, and their opinion was that the nuisance of smoke could be abated, and that it might be effected without any considerable loss- to the manufacturers.—(Hear, hear) That being the case, and no witness having come before the Committee to show that it was impossible to annihi late the nuisance, he thought the House ought not to throw any impedient in the way of his Hon. Friend's Bill, but should allow it to be committed. Mr. HAWES said as this was the second time the Bill was brought before the House, he wished to ask the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests, whether the Government had formed any opinion upon the subject ? The question was one of importance, and one in which the manufacturers and manufacturing dis tricts were deeply interest( d.—(Hear, hear.) Before leg;s lating on the subject, they ought to inquire whether it were practicable at all to annihilate the nuisance; and if so, whether the Bill proposed by the Hon. Gentleman was r with his Hon. F a ri ct e ic n a d b , le th in e i N t l s e p m r b e e se r n f t or st D at u e, rh a a n m d: calculated to effect that object.—(Hear, hear.) He Bill was a th g a r t ee t d he if entertained at all, should be referred to a Select Com mittee. Lord LINCOLN said that the attention of the Go vernment had been turned to the subject. He had him self consulted upon it several practical gentlemen. and he agreed with the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last, that they had now to consider two points—Was it practicable to abate the nuisance? and was the Bill before the House adapted to the purpose.? As to the first question, he thought it was possible to abate the nuisance.—(llear.) But he was at the same time disposed to think with the Hon. Member for Durham, that the Bill would not be effective.—(Hear.) The subject was one of great com mercial importance. He was inclined to think, under the circumstances he had stated, it was impossible they could allow this Bill to proceed. Mr. MARK PHILLIPS thought the Hon. Gentleman had anticipated the acquiescence of the manufacturing interest in introducing this Bill. In the borough he had the honour to represent, the corporation possessed power to make experiments to suppress the smoke nuisance. Trio power was given to them by a Bill introduced into that House last session by his Hon. Friend the Member for Durham ; but he was not aware whether the regula tions of the corporation had yet come into farce. He did not intend to oppose the measure of the Hon. Gentleman opposite ; but he would suggest whether it would not be better to postpone the Bill until the results of these ex periments were made known. Mr. BECKETT thought the Hon. Menber was per fectly justified in proceeding with his measure. During the recess the gentlemen of Leeds had several meetings on this subject, and he took the opportunity of attending them. Most of those gentlemen appeared favourable to legislative enactments for the suppression of the smoke nuisance, and he repeated the Hon. Gentleman was perfectly justified in proceeding with his measure.— (Cries of " Hear, hear.") Experiments had been made by several manufacturers, and he could state that the results had been most satisfactory. In conclusion, he would only observe that what had taken place in Leeds afforded great encouragement to the people of the town, and the results were expected to be such as would lead to very satisfactory regulations. Mr. MUNTZ said it would but very ill become him to offer any objection to this Bill, considering that he had lived in the midst of smoke all his life.— (Laughter.) But this he would tell the House, that in some trades smoke might be got rid of, while in others it would be perfectly impossible. For instance, it would be ruinous to the iron trade to do so, and therefore the House ought to be very careful as to what Bill they should introduce before they legislated upon this subject. In the Bill formerly proposed, it was intended to appoint inspectors to inquire into the extent of the rui sance ; but he would say that if the nuisanco was so small as to require inspectors, it could not be called a nuisance at all.—(Hear, and a laugh.) But let the House under stand this, 'that it was useless to expect to get rid of smoke without an increase of the expense of fuel. He had tried many experiments, and ha'l always found this to be the result. The great difficulty that all masters found was to make their men attentive. Mr. GILL said that both experience and reason taught him that there must be a considerable saving in fuel by the consumption of smoke. Mr. Alderman COPELAND said there was an appa ratus at present in operation at all the dockyards of the country by which smoke was consumed. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. PENAL ENACTMENTS AFFECTING ROMAN CATHOLICS. Mr. WATSON rose to bring in a Bill for a further revel of the enactments imposing pains and penalties upon her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects on account of their religion. He expressed a hope that, if the Go vernment should permit this Bill to be introduced, the discussion upon it would be taken on the second reading. The Bill was similar in its operation to the one which was introduced into the House of Lords last session, on the same subject, by Lord Beaumont. The measure had received the sanction of the Lord Chancellor, and the principal law authorities of the House of Lords. He did not imagine that there could be any objection to the principle of the Bill, and the details of it could be more advantageously discussed in Com mittee than on the present occasion. He was per fectly prepared to go into the subject, if th" House wished him to do so.—(Cries of " Move, move.") But he thought he should be better consulting the conve nience of the House by contenting himself with simply moving for leave to bring in the Bill. Sir ROBERT INGLIS wished to hear some state ments with regard to the objects of the Bill, and in the absence of such statements, it was impossible for him to vote for the affirmative of the question. He begged to state deliberately, that at present he could form no opinion whatever upon the subject of the Bill, for he did not know to what penalties the Roman Ca tholics were exposed, or from what it was proposed to relieve them. He should like to hear the statement of the Hon. Member before he decided upon the subject, and for that reason he would suggest the propriety of the debate being adjourned. Sir J. GRAHAM (who addressed the House amidst great confusion, which rendered him at times inaudible) expressed a wish that be had had an opportunity of speaking to the Hon. Gentleman on the subject before he had addressed the House. The measure was only a part of a larger measure which had received the sanction of the other House of Parliament.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) The subject, however, was one which bad been under the consideration of the Commissioners for the Consolidation of the Criminal Law. To that commission there had recently been added Sir Edward Bryce, Mr. Richards, and Mr. Amos, who had just returned from India. The first great question which would come under the consideration of this Commission was the penal statutes. The Commission intended to consolidate the statutes into one great code, arranging them under two separate and distinct heads. After this explanation it was for the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to say whether or not he would persist in his motion. If the Hon. and Learned Gentleman persisted in his motion, he would not offer any objection to it. Lord JOHN RUSSELL was understood to express his approbation of the course which the Commission intended to pursue, and he was glad to hear that the criminal code and the statute law were about to be con solidated. At the same time, he saw no objection to the introiuction of the Bill by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. Lord J. MANNERS said, as the Hon. Member for Kinsale did not propose to proceed any farther than the first stage of the Bill before Easter, he trusted the Right Hen. Baronet, the Member for the University of Oxford, would withdraw his opposition to the measure. Sir R. INGLIS said he did not oppose the Bill ; he only wished for a postponement to give time for conside ration. He would, however, withdraw his opposition. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. THE BANDIERAS. Sir R. PEEL said a question was put to him a short time ago, which he had answered, stating that if he were in error he would correct it to-morrow. But he was now desirous to correct an error he had fallen in:o, before the debate on the Post-office began. He had stated that the Consuls who applied to Lord:Seaton with respect to the embarkation of the Bandieras at Corfu were the Austrian and the Pontifical Consuls, but he was in error in this, as the Neapolitan Consul also made an applica tion, and this was the communication received from Lord Seaton on the subject. The brothers Bandiera conducted thmselves with propriety during their residence in Corfu, but on the night of the 12th of June they, in com pany with other individuals, to the number of twenty-one persons, embarked in a small vessel and sailed, as it is supposed, for the coast of Calabria. The Austrian and Neapolitan Consuls waited on him to be fur nished with the means of bringing back the vessel. This there was no authority to do, but he placed at their disposal the means of communicating the de parture of the vessel to the Neapolitan authorities. CLERKS OF QUARTER SESSIONS. Sir J. GRAHAM brie fly moved for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the appointment and payment of Clerks and other Officers of the Courts of Petty and Quarter Sessions of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, snd Gaol Delivery. Mr. FERRAND wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the Home Depart ment, whether it was his intention to deprive magistrates of the power of appointing their own clerks ? If that were the case, he believed it would cause a great many magistrates to retire altogether from the commission of Lovett. the peace. Mr. ESCOTT said he apprehended that was not the proper time to discuis the clauses of this Bill. He must, however, sincerely thank the Right Hon. Baronet for introducing so important a measure. The objeet which he should keep in view in the further progress of the measure would be to take care that no provision was in troduced into the Bill to enable any person who derived profit from former extortionate practices, to be remu nerated in proportion to his past extortion.—(Hear.) Sir J. GRAHAM begged to state, in reply to the Hon. Member for ICnaresborough, that he did not seek by his Bill to deprive magistrates of the power of appointing their own clerks, but he objected to allowing them to receive any fees except in Petty Sessions or in open Court. WAKLEY moved for a copy of any petition, to gether with a copy of the signatures attached thereto, which had been presented to the Crown by the Council of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, praying her most gracious Majesty to grant to that College the Charter which received the sign manual of the Crown on the 14th day of September, 1843. Mr. HUME moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the state and management of the lighthouses, float ing lights, buoys, and beacons, under the charge and management of the Corporation, of Trinity House of Deptford Stroud, of the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses, of the Corporation for preserv ing and improving the Port of Dublin, and of all lights, buoys, and beacons, in the hands of any other corporation, public body, or private. individuals whomsoever ; also, into the amount of the g ross and the net ap p revenue, ropriti on the thereof ; expense s also n , f into the managing the same, and the authorities under which the respective dues are collected and applied ; also, to inquire into the circumstances attending the pur chase of private lighthouses, and the state of the amounts of these purchases; also, to aseertain all the changes or improvements that have been made in lighthouses, Bsc.. and the extent of relief which has been afforded by reduction or alteration of dues in the United Kingdom since 1834 ; and how far the recom mendation of the Select Committee on lighthouses in 1834 have been carried out; also, to consider whether any and what alterations can be made in the amount of the light and other dues, and into the management of the same, for the relief of the shipping of the country. Mr. LIDDELL said it was not his intention to raise any discussion on the motion of the Hon. Gentlemen the Member for Montrose, but he begged to remind him that the Committee which sat on the subject, of which the Hon. Member for London was the Chairman, had not allowed this matter to escape them.. He did not see that the Hon. Gentleman could obtain any further in formation than was 'to be found in the report of that Committee. Mr. HUME said, that he had read the report to which the Honourable Gentleman alluded, and also the report of the Committee on Shipwrecks, both of which alluded incidentally to the subject. But the object which he (Mr. Hume) had in view was. a financial one, and neither of those Committees di rected its attention to this view of the subject. The Motion was then agreed to. POST-OFFICE ESPIONAGE. On the motion of Mr. T. DUNCOMBE the order of the day for the adjourned debate on the Post-office in quiry was read. Mr. M. MILNES said tl.at he did not know that he should have intruded on the House in this debate, but for the accident that he had lately travelled through the countries in which the unfortunate events referred to in the debate had occurred, and he had observed the un happy effect produced on the minds of the people in foreign countries by these unfortunate occurrences.-- (Hear, bear.) He had observed that there prevailed the utmost suspicion and the most painful surmises at tached to the conduct of this country—(Hear, hear). — Surmises not the less painful because he knew them to be unfounded—Suspicions not the less obnoxious be cause he knew they were absurd.—(Hear, hear.) (There was considerable talking in the House, and the Hon. Gentleman paused for a moment. The Speaker repeatedly called out " Order, order, at the bar.") It had long been the privilege anu the honour of this coun try that it had afforded refuge and asylum to those who were obliged to leave their , own country, for political differences or political oppression.—(llear, hear.) He thought that there was no ,inore gratifying retrospect in the history of this country than this,—that from the time when Elizabeth gave refuge to these who fled from the tyranny of Philip the Second, and from the persecution of France, England received with open arms the oppressed and perse,uted from all nations— ti and t eh L re i g b se e at r wt a i l np s g , ainufpu C l a ien r o l inhs contests place, heard the French Italians, and in the present day without distinc nebrdetwinegePntohtlheaists country and France, and when h., a g a nnaplaceand as and as far as he knew, that the communication by post was absolutely secure, and when he saw that the English Government could not make the same assertion, he was led to the conviction that England had obtained through the continent an injurious reputation, When he heard in the streets of Germany songs sung on this subject, it was no consolation to him to see his Right Hon. Friend the head of the Home. Department the hero of the fable—(Great laughter) —although he believed that no Government was less inclined to interfere with the liberty of the subject than that of the Right Hon. Baronet. Yet he thought what had taken place was not calculated to allay the' suspicion that had been ex cited towards him. The wife of Ciesar must be above suspicion—(Laughter)—and so must her Majesty's Mi nisters—(Continued laughter)—but if shehad not been able to answer the plainest question in the simplest Eng. lish—(Great laughter) --he feared that that Right Hon. Lady could not haVe remained above suspicion. No doubt n'great degree of the unpopularity attached to her Majesty's Government was owing to the want of their not having met it in the first instance with simplicity and candour. He did believe if the question had been met without difficulty or mystery, when the question was first brought forward by the Hon. Member for Fi ns bury, it would h ave save d a great deal of the pain which had been inflicted on the country. If his Right Hon. Friend, instead of investing the subject with all kinds of difficulty, had simply asserted what the real circumstances were, and declared the matter of opening the letters of M. Mazzini and others had no con nexion with his immediate Parliamentary duties, but was an act of a convulse)), nature. He was asked and compelled to sign these warrants. For his part, how ever he did not see why the Right Hon. Baronet was called on to sign the warrants at all. The Act of Par liament requires only one of her Majesty's principal Se cretaries of State to sign the warrant, and he thought it would have been much better had Lord Aberdeen taken the matter upon himself. If this course had , been pursued, Lord Aberdeen would have been able to give an answer when the question was first mooted, and whether satisfactory or not,' it would have appeared, in a great degree, the public indigation against the Government in this parti cular. Suspicion had been allowed to grow up—misre presentations had been allowed to grow up, with the determination,' on the other side, not to set anybody right. The consequence had been, that at this moment there was a most general and painful feeling pervading the country with regard to the question before the House. He would, with the permission of the House, say a few words upon the two divisions in which the question had been brought before the House. The first division was connected with foreign affairs, and the second was connected ssith the opening of the letters of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. With regard to the first, he had thought it to be his duty to propose to her Majesty's Go'vernment, on the previous night, a question connected with' it, and to a certain degree he thought the answer was satisfactory. It was satisfactory, not only to himself, but to all whom he had consulted on the sub ject. The answer was, that the opening of Mr. Mazzini's letters was not connected with the unfortunate expedi tion of the Bandiera family. So far, therefore, as Lord Aberdeen wasconcerned, he thought the explanation was satisfactory, inasmuch as the opening of the letters was shown to have no connexion with that unhappy band of men. At the same time he should say that the whole of this proceeding involved a very grave and serious question, and one that affected the general and foreign policy of the. Government. In fact, if this proceeding was to be recognised, the Austrian Government had nothing to do but gee the sanction of the English GovernMent to invade Italy. But in the case now under consideration that act had been committed by no diplomatic right: It might be that this was part of a great scheme of foreign policy ; but when the facts went forward to the world, to the English peoPle, that this act had had the sanction of the British Government, it must be a source of pain not only to the Government, but to every Member of the House. He should also beg to say he conceived it would have been the duty of Lord Aberdeen to have given public notice in the newspapers and by other means of the fact that the English Govern ment were aware of the existence of this conspiracy, and determined to defea t it; and if that had been done, he (Mr. Milnes) felt assured that this unhappy expedi tion would never have taken place.—(Hear, hear.) An other fact connected with this subject had come before the House, and it was one which the House would not find as easy to dispose of as the others—he meant the charge that had been made against the Government by the H in. Member for Finsbury, of opening his own letters.—(Hear, hear.) They all had had experience of how very indefinite were the privileges of foreigners; but that had no reference to the opening of the Hon. Member for Finsbury's letters, and therefore he (Mr. Milnes) hoped that Hon. Members on his side the House would' not refuse the Hon. Member for Finsbury what he asked —(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Milnes) did think that lion. Member had a right to get a definite answer from the Government as to whether a warrant had been issued for opening his letters.—(CheerS from the Opposition benches.) The on. Gentleman knew that his name had been mi li xed up with persons who' had been suspected, and who had come under the sentence of the law.— Mr. T. DUNCOMBE.—Name them. Mr. MILNES—One gentleman is an individual for whom I have myself a very great respect, Mr. William DUNCOMBE—Go on. Mr. MILNES said ose name was as good as a hun dred. The Hon. Gentleman knew very well that the line which he had taken in politics had nearly made him an object—he would not say of suspicion—but of great regard.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Milnes) did not believe that the warrant of which the Hon. Gentleman com plained had been issued unwisely. At the same time, he thought the Hon. Gentleman had a right to a full ex planation with respect to it. Now, one word as to the motion of she Hon. Gentleman. It was stated on the paper of the House that he demanded a new committee. It would be in the is collection of the House that the public were taken very much by surprise when they dis covered that the power of opening letters was vested in the Government. Sir John Hanmer—than whom no man, for his age, was better read in the Constitution of his country—was taken by surprise.--(Laughter.) The fact of this ignorance being in existence proved, he thought, the innocence of the party exercising it. He did think that if the Hon. Member had brought his own case under the notice of the House before that of Mazzini, it 'would have been brought with much greater weight. If his letters had been opened, it was his duty, as a Member of Parliament, to come forward and make the same charge then as now, and, most assuredly, had be done so on the spot, the sympthy of Hon. Members would have been much more warmly enlisted in his favour.—(Hear, hear.) He had, in a great degree, weakened his case by his delay.—(Hear.) However, he still thought the Hon. Gentleman was justified in asking the Right lion. Baronet if a warrant had been granted to open his letters, and that his Right Honour able Friend might answer that question. A very great question exists as to whether the present power should be continued at all.—(Hear, hear.) His own feeling was in favour of a limitation of that power. His principal reason for not voting with the Hon. Member for Finsbury was, because he believed that any Member who voted for the motion gives colour of the most unjusti fiable suspicion and foul misrepresentation with respect to the conduct of his Right Hon. Friend.(Hear, hear.) The arrows of calumny had been directed from all quar ters against his Right lion. Friend ; he had been ex posed to the severest, and, in some cases, to the most malignant censure. He was assailed by all the news papers, from the dullest down to the lively sallies of Punch—and he should have said, up to Punch, for cer tainly they are the best of all.—(Hear, hear, laughter, and cheers.) When he saw these things, he felt an honest indignation at the gross injustice perpetrated upon his Right Hon. Friend. The Hon. Gentleman con cluded by again saying that he. would oppose the motion. Mr. MACAULAY then rose and said—Sir, I wish to explain the precise nature of the vote which I am about to give. I cannot vote for the motion of my Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury-, and my reasons for not doing so are twofold. First, I think the motion in itself is objectionable, inasmuch as it implies a censure upon a Secret Committee of the House of commons. —(Hear, hear.) My second reason is, that even if the words of his motion did not imply censure. the lion. Gentleman, when giving his notice, coupled it with words which, even if it had been less strongly worded, must have conveyed to the minds of all a cha racter of censure.—(Hear, hear.) The original notice stood thus—it called the attention of the House, to tbe evasive and unsatisfactory nature of the Secret Com mittee, and then went on to move, &c. In our pro ceedings, as every body knows, a motion is often con• Bider d as explained by the speech of the Gentleman who makes it ; and in this manner a speech is often thought to criminate a motion ; but how much more strong must this impression become when the speech is not only strong, but the motion itself as it stands upon the paper, is a species of censure?—(Hear.) On that ground, if that were all. I could not vote for the motion of the Hon. Member. I believe the Committee did their duty honestly.—(Hear, hear.) From my own know ledge of the Members who composed that Committee, I believe they conducted themselves in a manner which left no room for censure. And moreover we ought to be particularly cautious of passing censure on secret committees, because the members of them are, from their very nature, and from a sense of public duty, pre cluded from making statements, or entering into those circumstances which make their justification and their defence.—(Hear, hear.) These reasons appear to my mind decisive against voting for the motion. A pro posal has likewise been made that a Committee should be appointed to inquire whether or not it be expedient to continue the present practice. Why. Sir, in my mind there is no need whatever for the appointment of such Committee—the subject is ripe for legislation—(Hear, hear)—and to a great extent I agree with the Hon. Member for Finsbury that legislation on the subject is necessary and desirable.—(Hear, hear.) For myself, I have at present very little doubt discussion may modify my opinion as to the principles on which this law should be guided. I cannot conceive how it could be made out that there ought to be any difference in the principles between the way of treating a letter in its transit through the post and after it has been received by the person to whom it is addressed. The letter addressed to me is as much my property—to the very same extent and under the same limitations—when in the mail-bag, as after it has been delivered to me.—(Hear.) After a careful consideration, I can see no reason for making a dis tinction. Both cases are, in point of right and pro perty, 'precisely alike. The very same inconveniences attaches to the perusal of my letter before as after its delivery—the exposure of my secrets takes place in the one case as well as in the other. As to public advan tage, there is the same chance that the public would derive benefit and useful information from the letter which has been delivered to-day, as from that which is to be delivered tomorrow. The right of the subject to his letter is subordinate to the claims of society in the one case as well as in the other. The convenience of opening a man's letter, sealing it up again, and forward ing it, so that he may never know what was done, I can perfectly understand. In the same sense it may be use ful to hire a servant who can pick locks, and open and copy other persons' letters.---(Hear, hear, from the Op position.) It may be useful and convenient, but is it, on the whole, justifiable and beneficial ? Can any one point out to me a case in which a letter, which has been fairly delivered to the rightful owner, may not be con verted to the same use and convenience? I would leave a power with the Secretary of State of sending warrants to open any letter, but I would require that after a certain time, that etter, which continued all along to be the property of the . person to whom it was ad dressed (unless it was to be used in audi cial proceeding), should be forwarded to him, with a stamp on the back of it, conveying to him that it had been opened by the proper authorities -- (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.) I may hear observations that might change my opinions, but I think this prin ciple is a sound one. lam aware that there may be in conveniences from the adoption of this principle ; here and there it might be desirable and more successful to procure other means, but we are not as Members of this House and as natives of this country at this time of day _to begin arguing the question whether all the advan tages to be obtained by adopting the principles and pur suing the designs of an arbitrary and despotic govern ment, are or are not proper.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," and cheers.) Should we restore that sort of es pionage and cruelty which existed before the Revolution, although it was there found not only advantageous, but as the politicians of the day contended, absolutely neces sary ? When I said the other night that putting to the torture had been iii some instances found advan tageous, there were cries of no, hut history does not say so; but, Sir, the question is are we Englishmen, from the ex perience which we have, to forfeit the benefits which we derive from the security and confidence of private life—to trust that no unfair advantage will be taken of us—for a system which though it may sometimes be attended with utility, destroys that confidence, trust, and security.—(Hear, hear.) I think a Bill should' be brought in, founded on principles such as those stated to the House—to such a Bill I would be disposed to give my sanction. Another part of the question is that which relates to the complaint of the Hon. Member for Fins bury. I must declare my opinion that the Hon. Gentle man is entitled to have that matter cleared up.—(Hear, hear.) A Member of Parliament' stands up in this House, and tells you that his letters have been opened in their transit through the post, and that he can prove it. The Right Hon. Gentleman does not deny this.— (Hear, hear.) He may say that a disclosure might prove injurious ; but, Sir, after what the Right Hon. Gentle man has said upon other cases, I do not see what harm it would do to speak out upon this.—(Hear, hear.) I defy any human being to tell me how it could' be attended with any danger to the State, for the Right Hon. Gentle man to say that he bad never issued a warrant for the opening of the letter's of the Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear.) There is another circumstance to which I did not attach much importance at the time, but which now strikes me forcibly, which creates a strang suspicion that the Government have not dealt fairly by the House, and which requires explanation. When we agreed to grant a Committee in this House last year, it seemed but fair that the Hon. Member who brought forward the charge should be a Member of that Committee; for, as far as my recollection serves, I have scarcely ever known a Committee to be ap pointed by the [rouse of Commons, 'in which the Hon. Member who brought the matter forward, who moved for and obtained the Committee, was not himself a Member of it.—(Hear, hear.) But it was sought to constitute this Committee on a new and peculiar prin ciple, and it was said that, in fairness and in justice, the Hon. Member, who was the accuser, ought to be ex cluded ; every Member of the present and of the late Government was likewise excluded, for it was alleged that the question would not undergo a fair and satisfac • tory investigation, if the Hon. Member for Finsbury, or a Member of either the late or present Administration, were Members of it. The House was carried away by this great show of, justice and candour, and I myself voted with the Right Hon. Gentleman upon the prin , • ctples that the construction and constitution of the Com mittee was to be so peculiarly fair. But in a day or two the Government had to constitute a Committee in the House of Lords.—(Hear, hear.) How did they manage. Did they act on the principle they were so anxious to carry out in the House of Commons? Not at all. That Committee was composed of party-men--of Members of the late and of present Administration, and of ex-Chan cellors.--(flear, hear.) The reason for not constructing the Committee there in the same way as here is as clear as possible. If justice could not be done here with Members of the two Governments, how was it to be done there?—(Hear, hear.) But as soon as the matter came :nto the House of Lords, all that careful exclusion of ex cluding particular parties was entirely forgotten. Now, Sir, it does appear to me that, unless I-hear some explana tion of the construction of the Committee of the House of Lords, the suspicion of unfairness will not be re moved from my mind. Under these circumstances, there certainly dues appear to be some grounds for believing that Mr. Duncombe's letters have been opened.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member may be innocent—(A laugh) —as I believe him to be, of all criminal correspondence, and yet representations might have been made to the Home Secretary, which might have justified him in opening his letters.—(Hear, hear.) A Member of Par liament, ho steeds up here and puts so grave a ques ties, tinder so ! .!J.z..v. - 00 imprztation, 155 utelitestion , shit. right, to tie , prieeeeeste enteoely 076; ail oy ;:le(oocr ., of this to recei% rt an aI.SW , r to tits questien. It is of the greatest importance to Members of the House that their correspondence should be inviolate, and that all communications passing between them and their constituents should be of the most free and confidential character.—(Hear, hear.) To Members of this House — the great inquest of the nation—people are sometimes in the habit of addressing letters, in which much is some times stated which should not be mentioned, much that may be disapproved of, much that it would have been far better to have suppressed—but still, Sir, the dispo sition in a Member of Parliament to receive corn plainta is a virtue and a merit, and he dis charges his duty by sa doing. (Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, if such correspondence is to be subject to the inspection of our political opponents, to men, it may be, of the strictest honour and integrity, still they are our political opponents—have their minds heated by the party conflicts which nightly take place here, and are is that frame of mind when they may interpret senti ments, perfectly harmless in themselves, into evil, and put a construction upon them which never was intended by the writer—(Hear, hear)—never once entered his head. And this power allows such men to open a correspondence, in its nature the most secret, and gives them an opportunity of prying into those very points upon which we are most opposed. When any Member of the House of Commons offers to prove that his letters have been opened, and offers to submit proof that such has been the case, he has a right, in my opinion, to substantiate and have his cha racter cleared up, for, if such suspicion is justifiable, he ought not to continue a Member of that House.—(Elear, hear.) If, on the other hand, he has bet nso treated without any cause, he has every right to re• paration. If the Hon. Gentleman's motion had concluded with calling for a Committee to in quire into the propriety of seriously considering whether we are not now in a condition to legislate upon this subject, I would have given my support to the motion. To a proposal for in quiry into the complaints of a Member of Parlia ment, who complains that his letters have been impro perly opened, I do not think there could be any reason able objection.—(Cheers.) Mr. J. WORTLEY would not support the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, and thought that the re port of the Secret Committee fully exculpated the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the thane Department. The lion. Member for Montrose, with that justice and impartiality for which he has ever been remarkable, deprecated the tone in which the Hon. Member for Finsbury had brought that matter forward, and looking to the quarter from which it came, looking to the per severance with which the accusation was pressed against the Right Hon. Baronet, he (Mr. J. Wortley) was im pressed with the full conviction that the object sought for was to attach a stigma to the name of the Right Honourable Baronet which was most unjust. He put it to any Hon. Member in that House to suppose himself in the position of the Right Hon. Baronet—the country in a state of tumult, and the responsibility of preserving order altogether resting on the shoulders of the Right Hon. Baronet, and would any Hon. Member say that, possessing that power, and knowing that it was exercised in similar cases by his predecessors, would any Hon. Member, in such a case, not have acted as did the Right Hon. Baronet? He had not used this power in a greater degree than had others in his position, and he excelled many of those in the preciseness and punctuality he exhibited in the exercise of a disagreeable duty. He would not allow warrants to remain in force longer than was absolutely necessary. It had been said that the Right Hon. Baronet had made an unconstitutional use of this power; but could any man say that the power itself was illegal or unconstitu tional? And it remained yet to be proved where the Right Hen. Baronet had abused the exercise of the power. Would they say that no letters should be opened ? Why, it was well known that letters containing ex plosive matter had been sent through the post, and would any one venture to say hat those letters should not be opened ?—(Laughter.) Hon. Members might laugh, but such things had been done. It had else been said that even the correspondence of foreign ministers had been violated, and that this circumstance had disgraced the Government of England in the eyes of Europe.— (Hear, hear.) But that power was not only exercised in this country but in every nation of Europe. Were they to have another Committee on that subject? That was the question. There was another and a more important question. On what grounds were they to give that Committee? Had they within those walls mere horn ur able men than those who had formed that Committee? The Hon. Member for Montrose suggested that they should have a public Committee, but if that Committee were constituted would they get the Noble Lord oppo site or the Right Lion. Baronet on that side to give any information on this subject, when such information would be afterwards laid before the public. What ground then was really alleged for asking for this Committee ? The lion. Member for Finsbury said, in the first place, that he was not put upon the Committee. If a Member of that House brought an accusation against another Hon. Member, surely it could not he thought that the accuser should sit as a judge in his own case. Could it then be asked in fairness that the Hon. Member should sit on that Committee ? Had he no personal interest in this matter?—(Hear, hear.) They had the Hon. Member's own words when introducing the subject, that he stood in that House as a double accuser, and was it right, or just or reasonable that he should be alloyed, then, to appear on this Committee ? The thing was prepos terous.—(Hear, hear.) lie had had an opportunity of having his witnesses examined under the most favour able circumstances, and he had not availed himself of it. And why ? He would tell them why, He complained that when be attended before the Committee to make his charges, and when he told the Committee that he had witnesses to call, they wished to hear his own evidence first. The Hon. Member then said, " No, I won't tell you the grounds on which I advance these charges ; I won't give you the date of the letters ; I won't give you the names of the parties." The House naturally enough wished to know why he wished to be present at the examination of the evidence, and the reason given was, forsooth, that the lion. Gentleman wished to protect his witnesses.—(Cheers, and counter cheers.) If these wit nesses were indeed to be examined at quarter sessions, or in the courts of the Old Bailey, by perhaps not the most sensible or sensitive of counsel—(Laughter)—amid loud laughter from the listening g alleries, then, indeed, the lion. Member might speak of protecting his witnesses. But in a Private Committee of that House, they might have been examined with perfect safety.—(A laugh.) On what principle, then, did the Hon. Member refuse to permit the examination of his witnesses ? They well knew that when they wished to appeal to the pas sions out of doors, or in the jury -box, they made the not calling witnesses a pretext for such a course—(Cheers) —and exactly so had the Hon. Gentleman acted his part on this occasion.— (Continued cheering from the Tory benches.) The Hon. Gentleman complained that his letter had been broken open, and he called this a breach of privilege. A breach of privilege ! Why the act of 1733 expressly excepted the warrants granted by the Home Secretary—(Cheers and counter-cheers, in which Mr. Duncombe heartil joined.) The Secret Com mittee proved that warrants had been granted before exercising that power. Mr. DUNCOMBE—Name. name.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) Mr. J. WORTLEY—The Hon. Member's name is not here.—(Continued cheering from the Liberal side of the House.) Am I to understand that the Hon. Mem be'r's accusation is that his letters were opened without a warrant ?_(Opposition cheers.) The Honourable Member does not answer. Has it been proved that the Honourable Member's letters have been opened at at all.—(Tory cheers.) Mr. DU NCOMBE—I have no doubt of it.—(Cheers.) Mr. J. WORTLEY—The charge was, that his letters were wantonly opened. If so, then the Right Hon. Ba ronet had abused the trust reposed in him—(Tremen dous cheering)—and the Hon. Member for Finsbury ought to impeach him for the offence. The Hon. Mem ber did not do so. And why ? Because, if he came forward he should be obliged to state in detail the grounds of his chatge. He shrunk from that ordf al, yet he sought this Committee. It was reported that Go vernment sent down officers to the disturbed districts to examine into certain matters, and that letters were in the course of that inquiry opened and read. Was it not possible that some of these might have been addressed to the Hon. Member for Finsbury? And were his letters to be held sacred, because the Hon. Gentleman was a Member of that House? He (Mr. Wortley) was in those very districts in 1842, and he was well aware of the disaffected feeling prevailing among the classes, and he in common with the country felt himself under an eternal debt of gratitude and obligation to the Right Hon. Gentleman for the firmness he exhibited at -that trying period. Let the House contrast the measures of the past and the present under similar circumstances. In 1839 they had a conspiracy of the most dangerous character, and he happer.ed to be in a court of justice in York where certain Chartists, the persons with whom the Hon. Member corresponded, were tried for having in their possession infernal machines.—{Shouts of laughter.) At that time a spy in the witness-box confessed to him that he was employed by Government from whom he had received 801. In 1842 they had no spies employed, and peace was preserved without bloodshed and without the punishment of death being once inflicted. A tumult, which at first was so general and so well organised, was extit guished almost without military assistance or any monstration of physical power. He felt that if they granted this inquiry it would be censuring the Committee which had already reported on the subject, and be se conding the charges which had been so pertinaciously advanced by the Hon. Member.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. WARD was of opinion that that House would not be warranted, after the speech he had heard from the Hon. Member for Finsbury, in refusing him the Com mittee of inquiry he called for, with a view to elucidating the causes for the opening of his letters.—(Hear, hear.) It had been said that those letters were opened because of his correspondence with Chartists ; but he (Mr. Ward) would ask, were not all public men, and particu larly Members of Parliament, subject to such corre spondence as well as the Hon. Member for Finsbury ? —(Hear, hear.) Was net every man holding a public position liable to be brought into a correspondence with the people ? The duties that those men had to discharge were of a very important character ; not, perhaps, of a nature as important as the lion. Gentlemen opposite, who were entrusted with the conservation of the public peace, but still a sacred duty ; and, therefore, those men were liable to have letters addressed to them from per sons in a position which might create suspicion. - (Hear. hear.) Admitting all the painful facts that had been stated by the lion. Member opposite, as to the bloody conspiracy that had been discovered at York, yes why he had with men in humble should not corresponderv . e station of life, although engaged in those bad practice-. with a view tit dissuading them from those erroneous and pernicious acts?—(Hear, hear.) But to return to the report of the Committee, he (Mr. Ward) did not Mall , 3 . - .. ~ r ~ ~ `1 m vot" to throw ary stigma upon the gentlem en who ee—i; tht that holy, either 'nclivite - - 11 % to. nry, he w4_ , ;1:1 mt , st tit,resr ev. ,;,. lx" .1 0. tell for the ext-lusion from the Couimittee of 'b e . I bis Member for Finsbury, because he wished to lulititbf question tried by an impartial jury.—(Hear.) obici would now say, if there was any legal authority . 1 1 f he (Mr. Dusieombe) could show that the opening ° ,O letters was unjustifiable, let him appeal t u the IV' ( i) land, and he would he ciTtitin of redress frog Denman, or any of the other judges of the 0 When he hear) the fi.m. Member tor Pontefract leis he manner in which letters wen . inti er o o rants for opening them, it put him (Mr. ward) I , ll d i i i of the time when he was ettp.;ng , d in the offices t o e mace for do ee years, during it hich time he ":„01 that correspondence of this sort was so commonly !re) that, upon every day after its arrival, he believed be read next day at Charing- cross.—(Laught`.'„,ge, fact, if letters Wt re writien c) pher at that. t h " t oe continued was the habit, that in a very short tt!eftiol who opened the letters became familiar with the ters.—(Hear, hear, and laughter) But balled. '`'6 ip what had they established what were a.OO sengers " for, but to guard corresp ondence 6/51 bet' fringement in foreign Post-offices. (ll ear 'lteri Let him suppose that a committee sitting i n o lobrj who wanted to divide the two countries, werLireolj. their consultations in France, were the Gove. - „f England to yield to their too Quixotic notions,', c ef was right, by not seizing upon the letters o f th v el: mittee, and thus risk a civil war by permitting Poldttlo re: pondence to go on ?—(Hear, bear.) li e 11 ,„, ° biel' that if this House were to grant an inquiry' 14 s uet f 1! secure all httt-rs from being opened, no O l i o , strong the suspicion attached to them may t i would be depriving themselves of the quic ke ';ll l safest, speediest, and most secret means of 5 e ,„%1 1 , 11 ., ° ; peace of the country.—(Hear, hear.) fie ny e or r t i ever, contend for it, that it was not from Pr i lc- fiegef , sonal motives that this inquiry was instituted' at be Ai that the object was a public and a good one ; I 'o l 4 5, fered from the Hon. M. mLer for Montrosiebe j 0 whole whole proceedings of the Committee shuttle, the® public.—(Bear, har.) He admitted also tbtblie_et°' monstrous exaggerations bad existed in the r t or i : e p as to the conduct of the Right Hon. Baro ne H° dm tary for the Home D. partment.—(Hea n) ttsc bc 10 1 he had silently borne the whole of the odinl,ali t oo i t y this charge, ev'in to the extent of the s lle ;ifice l° bags of letiers had been taken from the Post i i i Os, 0 4 Home•office.—(Herr.) Not witheanding, w eetel: l 4 o , (Mr. Ward) looked upon this report of tu e rt he 9 ,,ef' as a verdict of not guilty upon the whole C' h - a dli s •4l , —(Hear.) In the case of M. Miazini, he had with great attention to the charges Ingl e h il e n cori British Government upon that point; 13 ; 4 5,bed,,1 1 satisfy himself that the charge of hieo-cbotP,ol against them had been made out ; and b e to beV say that it afforded him intense satisfactiola the Y Hon. Baronet opposite declare last night ii t ", - wel ef o ,o br dieaa family had not been suspected. miabast should still adhere to the opinion that the a ITO Baronet had tampered with dangerous gr,...° ° , /} 0 50 0 , interfered with such letters as tll j - Jt fr l Hon. Alernbtr for Finsbury.—(Hear, hell% bo°_,,j''etr admitted that 22 men bad embarked in 0 p n3' without arms or ammunition or tiPe self protection. Mr. DUNCOMBE—They had ammuniti°ll. , Mr . . WARD understood they had not'..., ~er Sir R. PEEL—Yes, they had ammunth;ereett Mr. WARD—WeII, however, these In° • 6 0 7f°,Or r , boats, and in that state they sailed tronlib,uA labria, and would it not he ili.graceful t'' t isOl t dr; ment c_i this country not to grant a bill (); c0 u11,4, whereby to defend the Government of th l9 e si o : o : 4 those acts when the circumstances wer t h el) C;tir (Hear, hear.) As regards the report 0 1 ' 1 ",:. ibre, he should say that they were bound to Ine — of h ,lr without having recourse to ansione ri° a w e ; (Hear, hear.) With regard to the c liargi be eo I 'o' 4 Member for FinsLetry that his letters k g ' . °reed" he (Mr. Ward) wolld say that that was ne t iv r i , upon the Goverement but urn th,, e , Ji`t,g3 Member himself—( Hear, hear) and if r i feePAr Member had one spark of mel t f i l ', 4 d r would never cease until he had obtained _-ljeout“)lei sought for.—(Hear, hear.) He would on o f P i l o l ing, that he would support the mod ° :io e l i s lit Member for Finsbury, provided it wtP o ol 09 open Committee, for an inquiry into his c - h p l oy he was sorry he had involved it so 'e trio , general character. If he separated the P y no motion that had ever come before t i e he (Mr. W.) would support with more tu .. „ e rt iee,o? Lord JOHN MANNERS entirely eolno u• pie Hon. Hon. Member opposite, and he hoped therettdosti [lon. Member for Finsbury would be a l i t' $ ~,feill'i John Manners) would be content to g`7 o o_ ll _:4, er upon this occasion; but he wished to el s titi s tOs ,6 11 for the course he should adopt on t h ' ° ,hartyl ll ;‘ , the motion of the Hon. Member for F in- vl 4 Ol / fined to a mere inquiry into his own cas e ' pr:or P Manners) could understand it; but in 'T o r ell / he humbly submitted it could not be '.., tiot6l calling upon the House to prononinP jit 9 a violation of confidence by her Majesti ijorth , the report of the Committee upon (Hear, hear.) He could not see how_ D he o 0; 0 014 for Finsbury could imagine he had Pi -- 00,0 bi thisor o goi s e therefore, he (Lord J. Manners) should ocAll,lO/0 Hon. Member imagining himslf th e is vide which to test the veracity of the repor t e „ e tl o 4e, of the case ? They were simply of that Howe.—(Hear, hear.) What we— se. $ 1, the, bee th e .i f Member complained that his letters h n E isti f t oo l 9 and he (Lord J. Manners) would se'' , ' t _ he ,tri Member's motion were confined to t i " 0, 1 , 0 dige 1 , help saying he agreed with the Hon..i.stirbeel2 felt himself a degraded man, so long as hy rt),' attached to him as was apparent ni t ,' J. o „e l; of his letters.—(Hear, hear.) lie (i g ge°,, 'l° ),P, I fully agreed with the Honourable le to no man ought to permit his for Iwas, rd..g' opened, without instituting an inqui,r_Pa citi % i f or ot lk," so was an admission that he wus a uh t b o se ~11 t enemy to his country.--(sear.\ Oh '' t tbri s befoli would say to her Majesty's Governor g e • - , s r, well to pause ere they refused the rin: o . eld,'„illi;A tion, for he (Lord John Manners),,, 0 0 0 . , e fl t et„' would be unendurable in any ratin .. ,t h ,,, il be - r fr,,,e,, , , stigma, and therefore the Hon. Ill e ` - c i th e o4 ° , l 9; should find it equally unendurable; 10 . 4 the ;04(11 should upon him could not be removed unie-00ese,fristi sought for should he acceded by the osr oser.. e o s ° Er s 0' What was to hinder the Right Hon . i sA t iett )le, ing that which was notorious, that nee, a was in a state of alarming disturbsee''the ' Oir dressed from the distill bed districts t° . er jeff .. : 4 o, ber for Finsbury were op.lned by hythe rroi;sttit, hear.) He did not say that this w/is At 6° he 70,,ir should be taken to satisfy ought to be followed, but he thetloorl o triorj the Hou se 0 , if li e st',efvf for nothing could be more inischier:l.,--( geo,o, ous, than to I..ase the matter as it v t , 11 .7e 4 redio ig There was the Hon. Member for Fin' w / e t s o , t ) i:d g Itt g l oe of etimiderab!e fluency of tongue h ti . e se e *,itti ° o l J, josular vituperation—havir g road i e nation' : fliiiti9 statements wi•hout answer or expo' to tuv r e u: s le" own place in that House, and o pposit e ets ire i0 . 1 r i..9 Baronet against whom those stater° in lb i l ii ' c o°, and chin he was as,istiog at the tini e .ii coil, they 1,,) of the country —(Cheers.) Whht wan t es )° ,,r.) o ° , the public it the' 13:ght Hon. Geritl,cor, b i t' , " ),i ,, which he ventured to suogest?----(l'.;,te a tt le gli t ti it interfere with that more 1 3•1 ' /tie n t 10, 1) 4 9 had been recommended by his ge n ,:a gre l ts ee'yf o el ber for Pontefeact?—(Hear, hear. n ;i sf ete f a rey, It would eertainl' not make that p n wopt:oo3 0., odious than it was. An e xplane tl° l, of es se r let t : i system more tolerable to the Pel if Dee if 64 more likely to he useful to the Stata e c lot ' 0 0 17 sort to it, which would not be r "'della „.68 10 e 0 1 statements there was to be neithte e loat . 0 0 .4 1 tion. if the House was to be h'i i .., e ol h e e d 0 o rcel medley disputation, their positigh "(013,701:00101 These considerations induced hilli firr insu t I °l l not vote with the Hon. Menabes the selooe°4lll, motion) ; for, af'er the report ot,_,. o o ni ,_, th ° e e y and the explanation of the Bighl_i,ht, ii,., 0, head of the Administration last u!;o 3t h Le the' bet do v ,p4o 4, House had nothing further. oat w ith " Or' fli t the only case they had to de ' llB 4 Hon. Member himself. These , the 000 I t o , peated, induced him to heseeh in h ot i o o it holt o piV to word and alter his . th bite , vi tt r, ° f e l °,l him—(Loud cheers) —to vote WI _,. hot ye , c o ... r an imputation on the Committee u' so 0 00 i fiepo i o i Right Hon. Baronet, upon just aspersions had alreadY 13 ,, be refl . . be 0 / He hoped these aspersions emotion t a t t naotion w° el iti t l. debate closed, and that the oli e 1 0 as to enable him to vote for it. that on i _ of htl. , Captain LAYARI) thought r,otetoittee,hoagettri • f the ti to P . $ di whoreen cot., 00 . the honour and integrity o himself. ffieiej! ql must be deficient of either bl,,, ne t stl._, $0 11 _:,04 ever, that they had decidecel.V_."the pgr i r 00 09 s and that the course pursu a ,h2', u i r y su a o f A 0 Ili' rendered necessary anotheF e tv tht hea r ley , tP 0 14 mittee.—(Cheers.) When he D CA be l u ia be,, case, out of the House, he e e, „ flo or iil o co ni c of the Right Hon. Barone . 0 Dt_io. ~ o .i 4 the conduct attributed t .. ,.. 'eow _ e r e 0 5 0 , s fore, astonished when e hl_ i _ e was r r e par", A presented to the Hou‘slemu " s k 1101 3 * P° rel he could prove the allegation. e gig bah b e sP ,ve cr ei __her /t i e - a - r, he o e tt l e o i ep , e he he ll ar ° d n' tn e sho uld 00 h i s o a th e more when shoe when h heardo he t i his place that no Come d o ne r , eib e J that he took whatever he had d one .7, to th e ete s that respo fortP le I ( 0° sihility. What wet ~ , ,_n i t went ~,e0P.,e ? ,, , t0 no open inquiry ? Nv i'''onitrittee• r. o ttp 3 hi, that there was a Secret __ ld no t be J i t ht, f , s ty ; vinced that his character eu I rented). 61 ot hh ve fite " ; l that M. Mazzini had his . would n Übe be but it law' vi t • no searching illegal had been done ! a ___ gone to so a , o r for that ;_entleman to n , r et influe ne the Wl° teo of the Right Hon. Bar his case in 4 _ l , plsC e dite, i wiser course, and aid n no _ so , in P i g irO, f e t tleman whom he did not b : w „ sitt ing Oh • ' if; Mr. DUNCOMB (w t ld ber) poe‘olj inquiry would talte pficet• Jo t beet; red 141 hind the Hon. and Gallaa the Palt t ,r 1) here.—(Great laughter.) recent hint e t to 'lOO,OO, Hon. Gentleman woul p . . _...,„ abotie _,,,, 0 ;it (\S r. D's ) merits as .h e 0.070,,e b r t , rio 0 t , i But be would say that the “ hie !, be th i g h to 17i, fro of enough for any cause irit elt hns ' bee r ' pot / „1 0 / t hands, and industry and I x ii Ilear o f t he ; e t , ~,,,!, Captain LAYARDdri gretted thatfoto see mor e , •i 7 t conclusion.--(Loud Committee, lie found ~_„ ... r , e tteer,,t t ti t 0 ,4 0 sides of the llousec•r)iletsitaPdfenr,riitTrerfdt " b p i' : : 1 1 3 1 - : t C:' 111 ,10 11°:4 1 fort it'll It tiers had been turt_irettrti. t . 0, ., sio.e 11,4 most, discontinued. lie t the ~,01030'0,01:',60:191 were not able to leave ou ; t t l i ie 04 0 1 4 ci l i e lj, —(Elea,, hear.) Th e .„ virliS _A 11,,, ening letter - rc iSu' Or privilege of 01) • -, was ince t he I Secretary of State, bit 0 , ill lien themselves, as app eai a ease laugh whsr