The Sun. — London, England, 1844-03-13 00:00:00

tbtrb ambition SUN OFFICE, Seven 0' Clock SPI RIT Gl4of the PUBLIC JOURNALS, 3 1 THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. tithe ji--While the Marquis of Normanby presided lei f with $o while Departmeot, his Lordship applied him knitter , Praise worthy zeal to the improvement of the Piet, . precautions already in operation. In this re qiiis .!‘,` c Aublic has special reason to recur to the period whiehrinistration with gratitude, and to the change /I hielith rts ,,,,!, 44 , en place with regret. - Had the measures , e ttrie t i (3 - “, %le Marquis introduced into Parliament been 4 kes e ,, u 4 or the plans which he left in his office been 0o en r b l e ly his successors, the results would have been I t th e i bneficial to the improved health and comfort ill e in t a "ring classes, than they would have attested w iliek Z e3 t he felt in romoting both. The remarks ~.. L ee ie, i t 40 .,,_ Noble Marquis made last night in the House lia ke ' t 7 on the Bill now before the other House of Par iiiit the better the better construction of new buildings 9 , t ko 6,,. m etropolitan districts, deserve the atten i,", ~of the Legislature and the public. The ~,' slide of too important a character to be allowed "'it es hr its several stages without com ,44dises 11 ,!Prise will especially be excited that its ri qii a s u °4 4l have limited to the metropolitan dis -411,44 Measure which, in its most important clauses, 1'1404:1_10re required in other large towns than in the Ile e 'i `k), which its operation is proposed to be confined. Itt lier tue Provisions of the Bill relates to the con tikel°ll of th 1-: , b e _ e basement story of houses . which . may in uts tet tkerected within the metropolitan districts. At I ked, Cies() cellars —or, as they are sometimes desig- Llq httt4tehens—although utterly unfit for the residence iblibers,,i• wings,. are inhabited by whole families : b,. hudili a ieh—without distinction of age or sex— N ili, together. In these imperfectly-drained :14tstirgel.tantilated cells do hundreds, and in the large i kte d to rho towns, thousands, of families exist, sub iteetru,,,°se visitations of disease which low diet and tits 77.atraosphere naturally engender. That this 4 try s ts the suburbs of the metropolis is . true . i p, peek ed r ll of precaution, by which the evil will f 4 tl , L oth f and gradually diminished, deserves sup- If.' wli ) ! -I. ,?ni Parliament and the public, is admitted.. e th e should the Bill be partial in its operation? rillestinstence of the evil be general—if it be 1 ' • --n a ble that the grievance to be removed is i it ''Qtts Ili a yet more inveterate and extensive form else iLHetall in the metropolitan districts—what possible i t :7 of could could be suggested for legislating locally in ttt,eiketePerally? 'l. he Marquis of Normanby stated by le t iv-11111 Thu course of his few remarks on the subject, h iti le !en is not merely true of one or two large towns, tt. S t (6 111 a Very large number of places in the manufac- Vidfs - f tri , x _ et s. "He could name towns where actually e dist e i "ue inhabitants lived in these miserable cellars" sf4 .i et a i n which these and other de,criptions of tu 4 de s 7 t and closely- acked abodes of misery, filth, sO ctliter-11.tioa abound, P are the places in which typhoid ik:e.h hey nfectious diseases are generated, and from p h lnty i 4 _kre distributed to other localities. Every v i m, ti tt "Lthe subject has tended . to strengthen the tc , t li ne *round the places in which typhus fever pre a,, *hi l can be drawn with as much precision as mli k u divid ) ra hical district from t 4 et. The es en'e geographical 13 it in h • places Ik 44, tee eptitited e . e causes which perpetuate o the t str e e s e e ts Ilth their close The thenarrowness and /1 10 Of th_, houses. ness, want of ventilation and the h eat ' Ire in' and the great number of persons IS'ev e - :,iably crowded into these wretched habita se..ted C. 7 room, from the cellar to the garret, being 11 .141 1 Y ° lle and frequently two families—these as !II s e e d facts ' • )(i f , se b, is (while thy enforce the adoption of the sZrid CL° e the House of Commons as . a measure . of . 4,1°11s trrrievolent precaution, so far as its main pro Ct its" concerned) demonstrate the impolicy of con -1044 of °Aeration within the metropolitan districts, SZit., designed its provisions as extensive as the la l i t to remove. The Duke of Buccleuch 1 / 41 ,*, s e a tt „.orry excuse for the Home Secretary, by A . h . No te " nis subordinates the Bill was prepared, and kiLkszteAllduct through the Commons it is entrusted. yes t 7, R D. —The convict's dinner at Covent-gar tvphs tls t it re Yesterday was attended by just the class of a, fb e a : L e very one anticipated. Mr. Gisborne ac ,l4„"ses,', ' L im absence of respectable guests by saying 4 . gilt i T h e ," would attend a dinner presided over by a 4 44 143 44 - 4 7 give n to a Repealer ; but this explanation 410,,.f0r there are some honest and decent 1 44' , e ii. both Chartists and Repealers. The , 1 / 4 :: 44 l6,,gisgust went far beyond a dislike to Chart- NCal. The dinner was presided over by Mr. / 44 4 o.o4lltsby Duncombe, and given in honour of Mr. 1, 1 'at e ob ° , 1111 01; and further, it was given in open and kfi se nt t o of the law. Poor Lord Shrewsbury. irt pti en to prove the truth of Mr. O'Connell's de- Sits of hirn•—" A pious fool is the most mis- - V , th e Is fools," said the Irish incendiary, speak d vt bi red - oble Lord, and the unlucky Peer urge i kt ,!lit r„ hot Romanist zeal hurries to kiss the feet 14 tsesulter, and to prove that the insult was k it kil l tord Camoys, too, whose casuistry upon ! 1 ,? ( 414. E .: et „ of oaths has made him a little It - 4s these, with an Irish Lord Dunboyne— Yehifi elf is such a Lord represented los . tY of the United Kingdom upon the ti'rhh,,, The attendance of such a man as Lord kil k ltl eiv 7 (Lord Camoys is a Lord of yesterday) Vtrueti ce lebration, is a melancholy, but a . not ,1 4 1 44 ve fact " The pious fool," as the object k lt 41 , 4 4 4 !? . admiration called him, is a fair tyre . of Vtlat L '', even the best class of Roman Catholics. Li s , t ile rid Mr. O'Connell in deep . contempt—iT "yip Oa said as much—but the priest orders his ST ti t tsna ' sallow his contempt and his dislike, and, lt i ti v : of the Church, to prostrate himself, the re- N i f,, of John Talbot, before the feet of a peasant- N t t/ t 1 La 9 mountebank, who has spurned him. We , 5 1 144 ,hilerti Shrewsbury, who has been forced to this I. Nti:' Cve l Non by his priest, be a fit juror to try Mr. N E I? t n nell upon a prosecution for a Romanist t` he °e s Lord Shrewsbury now stand indif ,k,p4ritge stands unsworn ? And if this, at least a ,StiNtes stands of his sect, does nut " stand in -4k,i,ttllt th at ° stands unsworn," what reason is there to they oth er Roman Catholics would—how much 4 13,,,,14ight respect their oaths ? As for Lord `!te pr unable to agree with his Lordship „ 1 %, w ° Pec . manner of construing such solemn ..,,,,, .„„ will say nothing about him. There were, Zett Z er sons named, perhaps half a dozen other i, 4l4% tli',. l viv e ,. l4 an Catholics, or the husbands of Roman ;i l i t l.o 4l .', Present to relieve the assemblage from t lini I . ° f an unmixed rabble of the very lowest - Tra c i 4 :1 , Was ju s t suc h an assem bl y as oug h t to i th ‘,........._1t convict's festival.' -en ----- _____— kts 4tT lG r. i -q r ,„ i i t 4 1 ‘ESTER B 4 1 ' 1 1 'tit 11 GHF' li l i I I4 at • Van (t) 11% l 'kik p 4 h 4 °bert (t) k t t 41 04 C a roah (t) to 1 lost Ptonite 01 1 / 4 3t p an lie Forest (t) 14 1 4Nt e 4 edom 1,. I %ttt Taeitate ele (t)s (t) II N lt t4tll DEI kk 1 ‘ib t ~atta r, (t , k t ° l 4 tlt PRIY tti c f, ~t ° 1 Ltht T ;laad o 4," 1 40t it t , t - "t ?,,z l. 444 ; 4l ra d er : quire li t„ 1 ~,,a,atonreoo ki',N ll , ci -- , -4 T h e Prin ceb , \ l lli, ci tee 1 kl, 1N. , , , t COURSING. .cti l lit i l/ktr tti c, ll.l o.--Th e Gisburn Puppy Cup (16 dogs), ) i itt l h it eh j nail's Hawk. Mr. Hodgson's 'lingo's) ran 1, i kk t. enst es d a -e Cup (12 dogs), was won by Mr. Brand eteite; Mr. Rodgett's Swallow ran up.—The t int s,_Zere won by Mr. , Garnett's Gipsey Queen ; k tztiikt I k to NI L 1, b y les by Hardman s Carlos ; "nd the Horton 7 41 14,, ~it ,tr• Hardman's Trip-the-Daisy. s, ii t, w.,,ETisio.—A Sweepstakes for 1G dogs was rilr'Lk li , I"ianis's Fly. Mr. Hall's Snake ran up. 4 tkmt it !lr.l: l l l ) MEETING.—The Mold Cup (16 dogs) . it Y kii i gbes Sweep. Mr. Bennett's True Briton a t , 1 416,,atalure Stake. (8 subs.) were won by Mr. 111 -"': 11r. Bennett's Barrister ran up. N , I - AL PARLIAMENT. Cr IT 4„ — . S EVENING-0 ',l, "Us_ ~......_ "ViitAk k . E OF COMMONS. 'kti,,; 4 1 : 14 s11,ii k ° t ,ok the chair at the usual hour. 4 . 4 t :,tiiL ,030 0 - ''.' l l presented a petition from Suffolk, N• v• persons, praying for protection to titl it 4ft4b4 4°114 k• 4N o l lorr oik il S presented petitions to the same . ' ll l A' I "I tLY 4 ci-i, Presentedpetitions from the ear 1, p, ,et t ons. Ttkisakriplei„!nPton, Walsall, Bilston, and Kidder ,,44lktlead s e ' i ng of the monopoly which railway ll'dk l Ar_ :I , e • e ured to themselves in the conveyance of , 4ite7tee t 4 ,.E 4 k 11 11 the v . House to interfere. POlf `rou l 1 - ()RICE presented petitions to the Nil ly N I N joubarlington, Hull, and other places. t. ii, ill 7 :NT STONE presented a petition from kr.i*., . 4 VOUr of the York and Scarborough I4i ; (bt o its 4 lllll ' Move 0,,,, h _ _ . d that no private Bill for the Lkt:q Ceti t e - t l l 'ar lin e of railway, which shall have tOiO t htii7oful ti is Rouse to be a competing line, shall , t 1 kii et It be an . after Friday the 19th day of April A 4 t h _ iu,,,t t l fi t ,%,% in.struetion to the Committee of Se- N i t ';: te e 04 41 e tune for holding the first sitting of I ki tit 410 1, 6 of retaanY Private Bill for the construction 11 41 ) it), epee to b e w aY, which shall have been reported t le 4 : 4l 4 br e Xt. /I; ft co which line, after Friday the ' l e ed t ' n °er f ,, ti ' 3 'l•eat object was to prevent uncer t t is e , th e nation in theeases of Bills ready to be •t) en % , o re • , kk , 4 ,,,1i e,, ,s nalttee of Selection. /t ill l AlNTl, D a greed to : 1 11 1 0 4,, t 4 tatle4l;°obtain.ed leave to bring in a Bill 'll 4 A V 7, A Chester to Holyhead. v, s i l t is t , Ittl t !---ES ELECTION. lfor V' fro m .Tfornied the House that he had re lkl`ft:4lse"tt• t udi "te agent s to the petition against the 14, 1 4 tt l iAl iv tl lr bse ° Nv: -13 . ruges, stating their intention utk, It cl t tliti:e borS,lll)re,sen'ted. a petition from the inhabi t 44, dil t3' 0 44 of Lem_beth, praying for a reduc ,, I k k t ,Q031 1 4 ) tobac co ,' l lll ti k ~lIINs-rTOP ARCHES BILL. 1•:44 al 4 be li NE moved the second reading of ti tt th MM e k itlit et , e t ilt _ tuber said he hoped the House Nl ik 'e te w oeg roun T be read a second time, and he etAt i C o „ ere et upon which he asked them to do e ,ir . . present a vast variety of Eccle 'thci4 tt o In d• \(i k.: t o the ab out 301offeirent parts of the country, g t lus t ot ot4 r in a number ; an appeal lying 'hi t i, -Ar c h " regular gradation, and finally 'loan ea• This entailed a very heavy .. wis_ 11 "%Jiver° unfortunately entangled in 'NTELLIGENCE. 2 , ETTING.—TuisDAY. rEirrpt evr. 133 to 1 agst The Prior 35 to 1 agst Martyr 35 to 1 agst Reddeer (t) 40 to 1 agst What 8 to 1 agat Kent's lot (t) 8 to 1 agst all the three yrs old (t). tBY. ,35 to 1 agst Campanero 35 to 1 agst Vat Colt '4O to 1 agst Voltri 40 to 1 agst Foig-a-Ballagh 66 to 1 agst Sister to Grey Momus colt 100 to 1 agst Sir Isaac KS. ll to 1 agst Barricade THE SUN, LON:DON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 13, 1844. suits. What he proposed was, that any party who had the misfortune to be entangled in a suit in the Ecclesias tical Courts should, if he thought fit, have the right of coming there in the first instance, whether he were plain tiff or defendant. He did not ask the Right Hon. Ba ronet (Sir J. Graham) to allow the Bill to proceed fur ther than the second reading until the House had seen the Bill of the Government, which had been introduced into the House of Lards. Sir J. GRAHAM said he was sure the spirit of ac commodation shown by the Hon. and Learned Member, would lead him to suspend the progress of the Bill. The principle of the Hon. and Learned Member's mea sure, so far from b ing identified with the Bill before the Upper House, was directly at variance with it. Mr. ELPHINSTONE withdrew his motion, and the second reading of the Bill was postponed for a fortnight. COMMONS INCLOSURE ACT. On the motion for the second reading of this Bill, Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose to move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months, He considered that the right of the people of England to enjoy the privileges and rights of common, were of the deepest importance to them. They were rights enjoyed from the earliest times of their Saxon ancestors, and ought to be particularly held inviolable in any new laws they might pass. Knowing the sufferings the poor tenants in Ireland suffered for the want of these rights of common, he more particularly thought it his duty to preserve these rights to the poor of England. 'They were held by rights as sacred as those by which the landlords hold their estates, and in taking them away they were en dangering their own right's. He objected to the leading principle of this Bill, which was, that the present possessors of these common rights had the power of alienating them from their successors. He thought that in the granting of the right of voting under this Bill was fraught with much injustice, because two-thirds of the value of the holding being required, and all persons having leases at will, or for only 14 years, were not entitled to the right of voting. —,(Hear, hear.) The tithe commissioners were those only who would be benefited by this measure. Although those Commissioners might be done away, yet they were empowered to appoint others in the place of those now acting, and also that those persons would have a salary, although it was true that they might have previous appointments. It was quite plain that whatever Commissioners should be appointed, it would be their interest to promote in closures. But it was one of the most important duties of the House to provide the working classes with land to occupy them in their leisure hours. He hoped the Government would take up the subject of allotments. The Government ought to take care that they applied the waste lands of this country in such a manner as to be most beneficial to the people. The House and the Government must recollect that they were already charged with class-legislation, and they should be careffil not to give additional ground for belief in such assertion. If they wished to prove to the world their intention to sanction and support monopoly the would pass this Bill which was to give to the already rich the waste land of the kingdom. He objected to the Bill on the several grounds he had stated, and more particularly because the present occupiers had no right to decide on the appropriation of property which belonged to their successors as well as to themselves. They had no just de feece for this attempted vio!ation of the right of the exist ing and of the future poor of the country; nor could he see on what principle they desired to fasten upon the coun try at large the payment of the expenses attendant upon such violation. For these reasons he moved " that the Bill be read a second time that day six months." Colonel SIBTHORP must support the amendment, because in the Bill of the Noble Lord (Worsley) he could see nothing but a great wrong to the poor, a vast pro posed expense for secretaries, clerks, attorneys, and 140 clauses which it was most difficult clearly to understand. He saw that money was to be borrowed from the Consolidated Fund. He did not know what the Chan cellor of the Exchequer would say to this. He should be happy to hear that the Consolidated Fund was in a sufficiently prosperous state to make those advances to be repaid. They were to be repaid out of the taxes levied on the country. They were to be repaid out of the poor-rates. He thought the property of the land owners was already sufficiently burdened without having an undefined amount of money drawn from their pockets under the provisions of this Inclosure Bill. He objected to the powers proposed to be given to the lords of the manor. He, as a lordof the manor, might profit by them, but he would scorn to accept a bonus upon such terms. The Noble Lord had stated that there were 1,358,419 acres of land in England, and 501,815 acre in Wales, of uninclosed land, but he had not stated how many of those acres could be profitably cultivated. He had looked at the records of the House, and he found that from 1801 to 1835 no less than 1,919 enclosure Bills had passed the House, and when he looked at the number of enclosure Bills which had been passed during the last eight years he found that no less than 2,015 enclosure Bills had passed the House since the commencement of the century. Another objection which he entertained towards the Bill was, that it encroached on the rights of the poor, who had no power of defending themselves. The Bill gave the aristocracy an unfair power, and he was sur prised that Gentleman opposite sanctioned the 140 clauses which composed the Bill. He objected that obstacles were thrown in the way of the enjoyments and the re creations of the poor by this Bill. The Noble Lord said that the Bill would give employment to the poor, as it would cause lands which were now uncultivated to be brought under cultivation, but it at the same time inter fered with the rights of the poor. He objected to the Bill in tote. He objected to the manner in which it was hur ried through the House—to the expenses which it would entail--and to the oppression of the poor, which would be the consequence of it. On these grounds he opposed the Bill,and would support the amendment of the Hon. Member for Rochdale. if it passed the second reading, he would feel bound to divide the House on each of the 149 clauses of the Bill.—( Laughter.) The question having been put, Mr. CURTEIS said he would support the second reading of the Bill ; but he thought the Noble Lord showed too much tenderness for the rights of the Lords of Manors. He was of opinion that all manorial rights should be abolished upon compensation being made. Mr. DARBY said it had been alleged that this Bill would be injurious to the poor. He doubted very much whether the rights of common were of such great advantage to the poor as they were represented to be. As far as his own experience went, he must say that the persons who lived on the edges of commons were in the most wretched condition. He would vote for the second reading, in order to give an opportunity of having the details of the measure fully discussed. Mr. COWPER supported the second reading of the Bill. He said he thought the present mode of legis lating with reference to inclosures was a most faulty and injurious one, and on that ground he approved of the principle of this measure. It appeared from Mr. Porter's estimates that there were eight millions of acres of uncultivated land in this country of which four millions were capable of being brought into cultivation. Popula tion was rapidly increasing. Some persons looked to emigration as the only remedy for distress ; he thought they should look to the cultivation of waste land. The advantage of being able to feed a pig or a goose— (Hear, hear, from Colonel S:bthorp)—was very great. (LEFT SITTING.) structive conspiracy," so are the hitter ; and the voice of even-handed injustice demand that the corn-law repealers, as well as the union relsealers, should be sub jected to the same process as that which Mr. O'Connell and his fellow-sufferers have lately had to go through. Viewing the matter in this light, it is no marvel if the people of England should accord to Mr. O'Connell the enthusiastic reception with which he everywhere meets. We are glad that he not only appreciates the cordiality with which he is every where received, but that he at length sees, and can didly acknowledges, the great injustice he has so long done to Englishmen, by identifying.them with the acts of the Government. Mr. O'Connell is at length con vinced—he ought to have been so years ago—that the people of England have all along as decidedly disapproved of, and denounced, the injustice done to Ireland, as he himself, or any one else, could have done. Late as is the period at which this conviction has been forced upon him, we rejoice that he now feels it in all its force, and that for the time to come, he will not confound the people cf England with their Tory rulers. Know ing that English sympathy is with himself and his country, he will never again soil his lips oy apply ing to us the epithet of Saxons, but that the dis tinctions of Saxons and Celts shall hereafter be buried in the dust, and " England, Scotland, and Ireland " be the motto of all. Let Mr. O'Con nell abstain from the use of offensive epithets when speaking of England, and he will prove himself a 'patriot indeed. With the three countries cordially united and cordially co-operating together in a common cause, a Tory Government will be powerless for evil. With England and Scotland enlisted in her favour, justice must and shall be done to Ireland.—Advertiser. THE FIGHT AT MAHARAJPOOR. The following spirited description of the attack is ex tracted from a letter written by a Lieutenant of her Majesty's 40th Regiment, who commanded the light com pany:— " Camp near Gwalior, Jan. 17. " Our orders the night previous were to ad vance and take up our position to the left of the village Mungawlie, my company (the light) firm ing the advanced guard. We had no sooner reached our position than they began to play at long bowls with us, and the precision with which they fired was beautiful. We immediately deployed into line, and some of the Company's artillery came on our right, fired a few ill-directed shots, and limbered up. 'We continued steadily advancing in line, under a very heavy fire, across a perfect plain, expecting to receive assistance from cavalry, it not being the duty of infantry to take guns in that position. How ever, no cavalry coming, of course the sooner we got to the guns the less fire we should receive, and the order to charge was given and nobly executed, the 40th rush ing to the guns and bayonetting the enemy, who fell fighting, sword in hand, with the greatest coolness and determination. Stopford was hit here by a matchlock ball at the head of the regiment, and fell by my side. However, the fellow who wounded him was bayonetted by a sergeant instantly. We then charged after the retreating infantry, who took cover in a piece of cotton. From this place they were soon dislodged, after a smart tussle with the light company. We were no sooner clear of the left of the village than we were again within the range of another battery, and on our getting near the guns, we received repeated dis charges of grape and chain shot, which committed dread ful havock in our ranks ; but ' forward' was the word, and with a loud cheer the men rushed on. We now found our selves opposed to a very strong position, which the enemy had taken up at a well ; this well being surrounded by a wall affOrded good cover, and besides this, they had taken possession of a traveller's resting-house and made holes in the walls to fire through. Here they fought like devils : the loss on both sides was very severe ; amongst the number poor Codrington was cut down by a sabre, and Nelson shot in the arm. We marched into the thick of it, and drove them out with the bayo net; scarcely a man escaped, but presently we found that some trees near the well were occupied by the enemy ; these, however, came falling out pretty fast under our fire, when we discovered where they were. We now began to feel the fatigue very much, having been engaged for about two hours, under a very hot sun, and having charged over nearly four miles of cultivated country, besides the march to Mungawlie, a distance of seven miles ; however, we saw before us a third battery, and advanced to take it ; we were received with a most severe round of grape, and the loss in the ranks was very great, particularly in the light company. Here Thomas, Huey, Dawson, and Eager, received their hits. Nothing could exceed the coolness of the enemy, and had it not been for the British bayonet, the result would, I think, have been very different. It, however, maintained its deserved reputation as an effi cient weapon, and soon settled the matter. This was the last we saw of the enemy, and I assure you we were all tired and not sorry to get into camp, which we did at about 11 o'clock—having been engaged since $. I then volunteered to go out with a party to bring in our killed and wounded, which I did, and I feel the satisfaction that I saved many a poor fellow's life. When out on this excursion, I saw the last six guns left unprotected on the field, with several waggons of ammu nition ; this I reported to the General, and I was ordered to take a company and get some bullocks to bring them in, and at about seven o'clock in the evening I had the satisfaction of parking the guns in front of our quarter-guard. The 40th alone took twelve guns. . . All our Officers who were hit are recovering rapidly, but we have lost a great many men. We buried the next morning twenty-two poor fellows in one grave, and many have since died from the effects of their wounds. We have about twenty-five who are to go home immediately. . is now settled, and we are in possestion of the fort, with our whole force encamped about four miles from it. At first we expected another brush with the enemy, but they have now all acceded to our terms,and have enlisted in the Maharajah's service, or else dispersed and given up their arms. We are to return to Meerut, when lam not certain, but I fancy it will not be long first. It has been altogether a pretty warm affair, as you may judge when I tell you that in my company alone we had thirty-six killed and wounded. . . • . . I went y es t er d ay a ll over the fort of Gw a li or ; it :certainly deserves its name of the Gibraltar of India, as it is an ex tremely strong place ; there are a great many very large, but old guns, in the fort, and there certainly would have been many broken heads if we had had to besiege it ; in the interior of the fort there are severa old temples and buildings, very hansome and curious and altogether I was much delighted with my trip." NAVAL INTELLIGENCE. PRIZE-MONEY FO R CAPTURES OF SLAVERS. THE ACORN AND GRECIAN SLOOPS.-Prize-money, amounting to 13821. 35.,4d.,. is announced to be paid to the flag-officer of the station and commanders and late crews of these sloops. It arises from the proceeds and tonnage bounties of two slavers captured by the two sloops in company, one, name unknown, on the 29th of . May, 1842, and the other called " Oito de Decembro," on the 7th July of that year. It The flag-officer and Captain Adams and crew of the Acorn will be paid their shares on and after Wednes day, the 27th inst., at Woodhead's, 1, James-street, Adelphi, as follows :-For the slaver, name unknown, flag, 44/. 15s. 10d. ; commanders, 411. 19s. 10d. ; first class, 16/. 18s. ld. ; second, 10/. 2s. 10d. ; third, 51. ls. sd. ; fourth, 3/. 7s. 7d. ; fifth, 1/. 13s. 9d. ; sixth, 1/. 2s. 6(1.; seventh, l ls. 3d. For the Oite de Decembro-flag, 41/. 11x. 10d. ; commander, 38/. 19s. 10d. ; first class, 14/. 7s. 10d. ; second, 81. 12s. Bd.'; third, 41. 6s. 4d.; fourth, 2/. 17s. 6d. ; fifth, 11. Bs. 9d. ; sixth, 19s. 2d. ; seventh, 9s. 7d. Captain Smith, and the crew of the Acorn receive their proportions on and after the 28th instant, at Stilwell and Sons, 22, Arundel-street, Strand. For the clever, name unknown :—Commander, 411. 19s. 10d.; first class, 171 4s. Id.; second, 10/. Gs. 5d.; third, Si. 3s. 2d.; fourth, 3/. Bs. 9d.; fifth, 11. 14s. 2d.; sixth, 1/. 2s. 11J.; seventh, 11 s. sd. For the OitodeDecembro:—Commander,36l.l9s.lod; first class, 171. 12s. I Id.; second, 10/. I Is. 9d.; third, 51. ss. 10d.; fourth, 3/. 10s. 7d.; fifth, 11. 15s. 3d.; sixth, IL 3s. 6d.; seventh, l Is. 9d. THE DOLPHIN BRIGANTINE..—The proceeds of hull, stores, and tonnage bounties of the Portuguese slave brig Minerva, captured by this brigantine, on the 29th of May, 1842, when under the command of Lieutenant Octavious Cumberland, will shortly be announced fof distribution. THE FAWN (Bnic.)—The prize money arising from the tonnage bounty and bounty on -slaves captured in the Portuguese brigantine Boa Harmonia, by the officers and crew of the Fawn, on the 18th of March, 1842, will be also shortly announced for distribution. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Aylesbury, March 11. CROWN COURT. —(Before Lord AansuEa.) EXTRAORDINARY CASE. The Rev. John Day, clerk, aged 36, was Indicted for having felo niously and maliciously wounded seven sheep, the property of one William Weedon, on the 19th of July last. Mr. Birch prosecuted, and Mr. Prendergast ,and Mr. Sanders defended the prisoner. This singular case excited very general interest in the neighbour. hood of Aylesbury, and the Court was thronged to hear the details of the trial. The prisoner is a clergyman, and rector of the parish of Hawridge, near this town, and at the time to which the evi dence related he lodged in the house of a farmer named Glenister. Mr. Glenister held some land as tenant to the prisoner, and adjoin ing that land was a pasture belonging to Mr. Weedon, the prose. cutor. On the 19th of last July the prisoner and Mr. Weedon met in the high road at Hawridge, and the prisoner told Mr. Weedon that seven of his sheep had been trespassing in his close, and he bad impounded them. Weedon replied, it was all nonsense, for that the fences over which they had strayed, if they had tres passed at all, were Mr. Day's, and he alone was in fault. The prisoner upon this said, " Then I'll go and prosecute the sheep," and he and Weedon parted. It appeared that the prisoner went directly to his stable, in which the seven sheep were impounded, and having called one of Glenister's labourers, desired him to hold them while he han strung them. He took out his knife, and having driven the poor animals into a corner in the stable, he stabbed them all in the right flank to the depth of about six inches, after which he turned them out of the stable, and drove them in the direction of their own pasture. It happened that at this time Mr. Weedon was going by, and seeing his sheep bleeding and lame, and in a most pitiable condition, he accused the prisoner of having cut them, an accusation which the latter denied, telling the prosecutor he was a liar, for none of the sheep had been on his premises. The prosecutor replied that was all nonsense, for it was plain how the matter stood, to which the prisoner rejoined, there was no great deal of harm done after all, and the parties then separated. Mr. Weedon then went and procured the attendance of a couple of butchers, who examined the sheep, and certified that the damage done was 41. ; this was reported to the prisoner, who refused to pay that sum, but offered 21., and said he hoped he had not injured them any great deal. They were, however, very severely injured, and on the following day the butchers recom mended their owner to have them dispatched outfight and put out of their misery, and it was done. The prosecutor after this took no steps to bring the prisoner to justice, and would not have taken any notice of the matter, had not a neighbouring justice told him it ought to be followed up, and that he, the prosecutor, as the con. stable of the parish, ought, of all men, to be aware how wrong it was to let so serious a matter pass. He, therefore, laid an ln formation, and the prisoner :was apprehended and committed to prison. In his cross-examination the prosecutor said there was no ill.feeling betwixt him and the prisoner, but that on the con. trary he had been bail for the latter upon some other charge at the sessions. The defence set up was, that the prisoner had no malice or grudge against Mr. Weedon, and that therefore he could not have done the act in question from any wish or desire to injure him by destroying his property; and that the real truth was, that the pri. soner thought that he had a right to kill or wound the animals which had committed the trespass in respect of which they were impounded. If he sincerely believed this, he was entitled to an acquittal, as such belief negatived all notion of malice on his part, which was a necessary ingredient in the evidence for the prosecu tion in support of such an indictment. The jury took this view of the case, and acquitted the prisoner. The Loan CHIRP BARON, addressing the prisoner, advised him to be very circumspect in future. and endeavour to govern his temper. It was really most lamentable to see such an ignorance of the first rules and principles of law in a man occupying the sta. tion and filling the office which the prisoner occupied and filled ; and he most seriously advised him to profit by the grace and the mercy which had been shown to him, by applying some portion of his time in acquiring a knowledge of the laws of his country and the rights of his neighbour. The prisoner was then dischargel. - - ----- Colonel Gore Langton was prevented dividing in favour of Mr. Cobden's motion, on Tuesday night, in conse quence of an attack of influenza. ROCHDALE FLANNEL MARKET, MARCH 11.—There has been another quiet market to-day ; much similar to that of the preceeding week. Prices are low, and the demand more limited than it was two or three weeks ago. In the wool market there is very little change, prices firm, and sales . rather limited. STATE OF TRADE AT MANCHESTER.—There was another quiet market yesterday ; the demand for nearly all ordinary counts of yarn, and for all descriptions of goods (with the exception of 40-inch shirting, in which a large business was done at improved rates), being still limited. Prices, however, were generally firm ; and the market on the whole bore a healthier appearance than at any time during the previous fortnight. —Manchester Guardian. NOVEL METHOD OF EXTRACTING A TOOTH.—A few days ago a tailor, residing at Lound, near Retford, of the name of George Grant, was dreadfully afflicted with the toothache. Well, Mr. Snip, being nigh at his wit's end with pain, and there being no village amateur capable of extracting the troublesome customer, he set his wits to work to get rid of it with the least possible trouble, and a the earliest opportunity. At length he hit upon the following expedient :—He tied a • piece of strong packthread round his naughty masticator, and proceeded determi nately up stairs, with his goose in his hand ; having tied the other end of the string to the goose's neck, he threw the latter with some vengeance out of the chamber window, the jerk at once extracted the tooth, which quickly followed she goose into the street; and the delighted tailor, pleased with the novel invention of his own brain, soon gathered up He weightiest implement used in his pro fession, and put it to the fire, but left the luckless tooth to "perish and decay," unpitied and uncared for, in " the desert air."—Don.. caster Chronicle. PUBLIC PETITIONS.—The following is a list of the total number of petitions on various important subjects now before the Lower House of Parliament, viz.:—Against the proposed union of the dioceses of Bangor and St. Asap!), 27 petitions, signed by 2,309 persons; against a repeal of the corn-laws, 216 petitions, signed by 18,277,—the number of petitioners having in creased during the last week by about 5,000 ; for a reduction of the tobacco duties, 65 petitions, signed by 8,300 persons; against the Factories Bill now before Parliament, 4 petitions, signed by 389 persons; for an alteration of the Poor.law Amendment Act, 35 petitions, signed by 1,746 persons,—the number having in creased by 645 during the last week; for a free competition in the carriage of goods, &c., 6 petitions, signed by 3,112 persons ; and for withholding the supplies until the grievances of the people are redressed, 41 petitions, signed by 34,373 persons. EXTRAORDINARY LONGEVITY.—" The centenarians are falling off," says a letter from Konigsberg, published in the Presse; "we have just buried in this town a veteran of the seven years' war, named Siehring, aged 108 years. He was born at Messein, in 1736, and joined the army of Frederick the Great, after the battle of Torgau, in 1760. He was the last surviving veteran of the war of seven years who resided at Konigsberg, wkere a perfect recollection exists of Sergeant-Major Condratowitz, who died in 1838, at the age of 105, and who assisted as a sim ple hussar, under the command of Seydlitz, at the celebrated battle of Rossbach, which was gained by Frederick the Great, against the French and Austrians united." IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 12. GWALIOR. The Earl of RIPON laid on the table of the House certain papers relating to Gwalior. CORN-LAWS. Petitions in favour of protection for agriculture were pre sented by the Duke of Richmond from Yorkshire, and the Earl of Rosebery from Linlithgow. The Noble Earl inti mated that he did not agree with the prayer of the petitions. MAYNOOTH COLLEGE. Lord MONTEAGLE rose to put a question to the Noble Lord opposite, respecting the College of Maynooth, and in doing so, he did not mean to make the slightest allusion to a state provision for the Roman Catholic clergy. During the existence of the penal laws, Catholic clergymen were compelled to seek in foreign countries for their education, and it was not until subsequent to 1795 that any grant was made to the Catholic College. He knew that many of the men who were educated as Catholic clergymen abroad before the French Revolution, were men of very highly educated and enlightened minds, but at the same time he thought, as a matter of policy, it would be better if the Irish Roman Catholic clergy were not compelled to receive a foreign education. He now came to the condition in which the College of May nooth was at present placed. It was asked why should this college not be enlarged, and why should it be kept exclusively for Catholic ecclesiastics? Why, at the time of the endowment of this college a petition was _presented to the Irish House of Commons, praying that Protestant students might be admitted to the college. This prayer was not granted. On the contrary, a provision was introduced into the Bill which endowed the college, by which no per son p ro f ess i ng t h e Protestant religion could be admitted into the college. It was therefore unfair to complain of this prohibition, considering that that prohibition had been created by our own laws. In the year 1808 an application was made to Parliament for an increased grant to the College of Maynooth In answer to that application the Noble Duke opposite ( Wellington), then Sir Arthur Wellesley, wrote to the authorities of the college to state what ground they had for making their application. Upen the answers which were then furnished to the Noble Duke, he (Lord Monteagle) had founded the motion with which he intended to conclude. Although he knew there was no intention on the part of those in autho rity to withdraw it, yet he feared that from ignorance of the facts many persons in this country were averse to the only available means by which it could be made useful, namely, by increasing the grant. There were 500 students altogether, 250 of whom were supported out of the funds of the college, yet the amount of the grant was only 9,0001. ; and the cost for each of these persons was only 23/. a head. lie thought this very wrong in the ease of men who were to exercise a vast influence in the country in after life. The labour they were ready to un dergo, and the virtue which they displayed in all cases, was most admirable. As an instance, he would state that, accord ing to the Government returns, in one week no less than ten Catholic clergymen were carried off by typhus fever in the county of Kerry, and he could name many other cases in othercounties. At present the College of ltlaynooth was in a state of great dilapidation from the want of proper funds to repair it. Surely that was not a fit state of things for such an establishment.—( Hear, hear.) He believed that the Government, by taking an enlarged and liberal view of this matter, would be doing far more for the benefit and tran quilisation of Ireland than by any other measure. The more sensible people of Ireland were in favour of their clergy receiv ing that liberal education which would place them upon a level with the Protestant clergyman and the country gentleman. By doing so the Government would also show to the people of that country that they were anxious to promote their temporal welfare and spiritual happiness. How could Noble Lords ex pect that children who were reared in happy and comfortable homes would join such an establishment ? There were no fel lowships or scholarships attached at present to this college ; but still he thought that there ought to be some small endowments for the benefit of the more deserving stu dents. The Government, even if they did not take the general support of the establishment upon themselves, yet ought to place the buildi ng i tself under the superintendence of the Board of Works, and guarantee that it should be kept in proper repair. As a matter of policy they ought to get the hearts and feelings of the Roman Catholic clergy with them, and they would be their best coadjutors in maintaining peace and good order. It was a mistake to apply the term, " agitating priests" to the Catholic clergy of Ireland, because the greater Lumber of these priests were against all system of political agitation. The Noble Lord concluded by moving for certain returns with respect to the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth. The Duke of WELLINGTON said he would have no ob jection to lay before the House the returns moved for by the Noble Lord. He was glad that the Noble Lord had brought the matter before the House. At the present moment, he, (the Duke of Wellington), was not prepared to state that there would be any alteration in the present grant to the College of Maynooth ; but if there were any intention of that kind, a declaration to that effect ss ould be made in the other House, from whence the grant emanated. He should afford the Noble Lord all the information of which her Majesty's Government were in possession. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought it essential that the Catholic clergy should be men of high education, in order that they might properly discharge their religious functions; but how, he would ask, could this, be done, when the grant was so paltry ? One of the great benefits which was attributed to the system of the English Universities was that it brought the clergy and upper classes of the laity into nitre intimate intercourse, pied he thought it most desirable that the same should be the case with respect to the Catholic clergy and the upper classes of the Roman Catholic laity in Ireland. The fullest information was already before the House with re spect to this subject, and he called upon her Majesty's Govern.. meat to act upen it, for upon them lay the whole responsibility of this truly important matter. After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE in reply, the returns were ordered to be laid on the table. Their Lordships then adjourned at Half-past Seven. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 12. DUTIES ON IMPORTS. every Mr. COBDEN (in continuation from our Thi r d E d i tion) said—As regards cheese, I a m likewise prep are d to prove goes to toa landl or d. Thi s , that more than one-half of that which the landlord in the shape of rent. For every sd . paid for cheese, 2d. goes to the landlord; and in the sam e way i n the g w r o a r z t i h n g o d f i b s t e r e i f c t s t , h s a u t c i h s a s o s those d . o f g N o e o s r t t h o a m t h p e t on, formarket, t , goes t o d. is a point the public need not be concerned about for the farmer. Ido not put it forward on that ground. I never told you that you raised the rent of your land by the corn-laws. 1 never believed it. Bet if you come to this House and enact apparently for the benefit of th e f armer, and say that free trade ruins the agriculturist, then I mus t put forward the real state of the case. I shall n ow touch upon another and more important branch of this question, I mean the interests of the farm labourer. W . e are told t h at he is be nefited by a system of rest r i c tio n which makes t h e first ele ment of existence scarce. D o you think posterit y will believe it? They will look back u p on thi s doctrine, in less than twenty years, with as much amazement as we do now upon the conduct of our forefathers when they burnt old women for witchcraft. Yet in the face of th e p l a i nest evidence you go on maintai n i ng a law which makes food, scarce, in order to benefit the agriculturist. We have had a volume presented to us on the condition of the agricultural population, which ought to be before the House long before this time. A Commission was appointed last year to inquire into the em ployment of women and children in husbandry, and I w i sh to state the manner in which that Commission had been appointed. I was a party to having that Commission named; as a motion was made by an Honourable Friend near me for the purpose of having a Committee then sitting on the employment of women and c hild ren in manufactures extended to the agricultural labourers. The Committee had been sitting for two years in a particular form, and was afterwards engaged, I believe, for four years in inquiring into the condition of labourers in oth er trades and manufactures. What my Hon. Friend and myselfwished was, that a similar inquiry to that then carried on before that Committee should be instituted into the condition of the agricultural poor. --(Hear, hear.) An application was made for the purpose to a member of the Cabinet, but he refused to consent to the ap pointment of a Committee, and would only agree to allow a Commissioner under the poor-law to take evidence on the sub ject. He also refused to allow the Commissioner more than thirty days to carry on the inquiry, notwithstanding the length of time that the Committee to which I have alluded had taken for a similar inquiry.—( Hear, hear.) Having under the law only thirty days to complete the inquiry, Mr. Austin set forward sin his task, and lost two days in his journey. He had thus only twenty -eight days to inquire into the condition of the agricultural labourers in four counties in the south of Eng land. —( Hear.) We have, however, some facts elicited on that inquiry, which ought to have drawn forward remarks from Honourable Gentlemen opposite as to the wretched condition of their own constituents.—( Hear.) Before I allude to the condition of the agricultural labourers, I wish to state that whatever may have been the animus which influenced others in invading the manufacturing districts, I have no hostile feel ing whatever towards the agriculturists ; for, bear in mind, that my condu c t h as b een throughout marked by consistency towards them.—( Hear.) I brought forward the case of the manufacturers, and I have throughout maintained their interests. We first knocked at the door of this House in 1839. We have since then continued to do so, without intermission. We have knocked at the doors of Ministers and Prime Ministers, until they complained of intrusiveness on our part. We stated the entire of the distress to which the manufacturers were exposed. We did more. We prescribed a remedy for that distress.— (Hear, hear.) .Ind here I may state my solemn belief that one of the principal reasons why the last four years of such fearful suffering and destitution among the manufac turers of Lancashire, and Yorkshire, and a part of Scotland, has passed over without any consider able destruction of property, or the loss of a single life, was because they knew that a great body was actively and incessantly at work to make known their suffer ings, and to find a remedy for their distress.— ( Hear, hear.) I also state as the result of nay conviction, that the labouring poor would not have taken the diabolical and insane course of burning property in order to make known their sufferings, if any party devoted to their interest had come forward in this House and in the country to make suggestions for their relief.—( Hear.) If it were known that the sympathies of the country were aroused in their behalf, the fact would have produced such a humanising effect upon them, that they would never have had the blindness to destroy the very property that ought to give them employment and support. ( Hear, hear.) I have looked through this volume, which is the result of Mr. Austin's twenty-eight days' travels through the agricultural districts, and 1 find that during that period he visited Somerset:hire, Devonshire, Wiltshire, and Dorset shire. He has given the testimony of various re spectable gentlemen in these several localities, as to the condition of the agricyltural labourers. Some of these ac counts are highly important. The first that I shall refer to is the evidence of the Rev. J. Guthrie, who states that he could never make out how the poor labourers lived and supported their families on the wages which they received. The next is the evidence of Dr. Greenock. (The Honourable Gentleman then read extracts from the evidence alluded to, in which the witness stated that in the union to which he be longed the support of each pauper cost, on an average, Is. 6d. for food alone, though the guardians, by purchas ing provisions wholesale, were able to procure,them 10 percent. cheaper than the public generally ; and that he could not con ceive how an agricultural labourer, earning 6s. a week, could possibly support his wife and four or five children, and at toe same time pay rent and procure clothing. Another witness, a medical gentleman in the same district, stated that the women and boys who la boured in the fields suffered materially in their health, not from the extent of work which they performed, but from the want of a sufficient supply of food. He also read a passage from the evidence of Robert Boland, a farmer, stating that in the great majority of eases, a family, consisting of a man and his wife, with four or five children, were obliged to subsist on eight shillings or nine shillings a week, and passages from the evidence of the wives of two agricultural labourers, describing the inferior uature of the food which they made use of, and stating that their children were always anxious to get more food when they rose from their:meals.) The Hon. Gentleman then continued. That is a just specimen collected in the south of England, in the purely agricultural districts, by Mr. Austin. I have my self had the opportunity of making considerable observations in the agricultural districts, and 1 have come to this result, that the further you travel from that much maligned region of tall chimneys and smoke, the less you find the wages of labourers to be ; the more I leave behind me Lancashire and the northern parts of England, the worse is the condition of the labourers, and the less is the quantity of food they have. Does not this, I will ask, answer the argu ment that the agricultural labourer derives no protection ? ( Hear, hear.) Now what I wish to bring out before the Com mittee is this—that even during your casual high prices, caused by scarcity, the agricultural labourers always suffer.—( Hear. ) Pauperism increases as the price of food rises—( Hear)—and in short, the price of the loaf is in a direct ratio proof of the increase of pauperism. —( Cries of " No, no.") An Honourable Gentleman says, " No, no." I hope I shall have him on the Committee, and if he will only hear me out, I am sure I shall persuade him to vote for the Com mittee. 'With regard to the condition of the agricultu ral labourer, I have taken some pains to ascertain what has been the progress of wages in agricultural districts. I know that it is a very sore point indeed for Hon. Members opposite but I must tell them that i n th ose ver y di s t s i c t s o f Wilts and Dorset the wages of labour now are about on a par with wages 60 years ago, while the rent on land has increased from two-and-a-half to threefold.—( Hear, hear.) Now, I consider that to be a very sufficient answer to the statements that have been made of the increase of gages. When you have a law that produces scarcity, while it increases rents, you must not be surprised if you are called upon to look at how the system works upon those you profess to say it was made to improve the condition of.—(Hear.) Now, the following is, I believe, a correct statement of the price of wages. In Devon they are from 6s. to 7s. 6d. a week. In Wiltshire from Gs. to 7s. In Somersetshire from 7s. to 9s. In Dorset from 6s. to 75., wheat being at the time his. a bushel, and in Gloucestershire from 6s. to 75., while the rents have in creased three-fold. Now, you have chosen to take this course in an illegitimate way.—( Hear, hear.) You cannot therefore wonder when I call upon this House to consider how these laws have acted upon you, and upon those whom you profess to serve. I was down in Gloucester a little while ago, and had a good deal of conversation with a Mr. Hand ford, an experienced land agent, who stated that he had lately sold property which had belonged to his great grandfather, and which brought him ten times the price his ancestor had giver, for it. I have lately been reading a work published by Judge Hale, somewhere about the time I am referring to—somewhere about 1683—and in it he states that the then wages of the labourers averaged 10s. per w eek ; and he remarks, unless a fa ther, mother, and four children, have this amount per week, how are they to get on but by stealing. Now, in the present day, wheat is forty per cent. higher, and wages have dropped pretty generally to only seven shillings per week. It is an actual fact that I found, on the journey that I am referring to, that the labouring poor out of doors are actually compelled to live on less than what is allowed in the workhouse. ( Hear, hear.) A gentleman of the name of Hunt, a guardian of the poor in that district, told me, that on consult ing with the medical officer as to the diet, he found it on a scale much higher than those who were working hard out of doors were enabled to get.—(Hear, hear.) Now I have spoken of the food of these people, anti when I do that I imply also lodging, clothi ng , mora li ty , e d ucat i on — aye , an d re li g i on also.—( Cheers. ) There is a point in the volume of evidence which I have already referred to, which more especially calls for the attention of this House. I mean the subject of lodgings for the agricultural poor.— (Hear, hear.) In this question, more almost than in any other, is the character of the landlords concerned. Mr. Austin states an instance of a fa mily at Stourbridge of eleven persons in one room and three beds. In the first bed was the father and mother, a little boy, and a little girl; in the second bed were three daughters, two of them twins, twenty years old; and in the third f our sons, fif teen years old, seventeen years old, and the like._. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") There were no cur tains to the beds, nor anything else to assist in observing the decencies of life. —k Hear, hear.) Mr. Phelps, agent for the Marquis of Lansdowne, has given an instance which occurred at Studeley, where twenty-nine ersons were living under one roof—the married people and the young persons being all huddled together in one small tenement.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr. Austin further says, that a married woman told him the room in which she was being confined was shared with thirteen other persons, in three beds; and that it was neces sary to lay her on the middle of the floor, in order that proper attention should be given to her, and she declared this to be the most painful part of her illness.—( Hear, hear.) Another clergyman of Dorsetshire stated that he resided in the neighbourhood of a Noble Duke—whose name he (Mr. Cobden) would not mention, although the Noble Duke was not himself very fastidious as to the terms in whirls he spoke of the members of the League—the labourers were as badly off as they could be. Nothing could exceed their immorality, even between brother and sister.— ( Great sensation.) In some cases, in order to prevent this, the males of two families were taken to sleep in the one house, and the females in the other.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") Mr. Austin declares that he could see no regard to chastity in the females, and no respect to that sex in the men.—( Hear.) Sir, I should not do justice to my feelings if I did not express my indignation at the cond uc t o f th e owners of land, however they may be described.—(" Hear," from Lord Ashley.) I am glad to hear that cheer from the Noble Lord. However you may remark upon the ownersj of mills and factories, and upon the evils of town populations, I think you must acknowledge that these cannot come under the cog nisance of particular individuals, and certainly not of any particular proprietor ; but if you go into the villages under the control of the landlord, you will find them living in a state worse than in the wigwams of the Indians. It was well said by the late lamented Mr. Drummond, that " property had its duties as well as its rights," and I say that the landlords neglect their duty when they allow their tenants to live in pig sties, and ;worse than pigsties. I never saw the Rev. Adol phus Osborne ; I think if we met, we should differ upon many points ; but I cannot but admire the moral courage with which he exposed the state of the population in Dorsetshire.— (Cheers.) He says that "in the neighbourhood of Bradford, from one year's end to the other, the people live in the greatest destitution. They had nothing but bread and pota toes, with sometimes a little bacon of an inferior kind, and, from what he knew of the quality of the bread, he was not sur prised at the diseases with which the children are afflicted." Another clergyman gave evidence to the same effect, from which I shall trouble the House with an extract. (The Honourable Gentleman then read a passage from Mr. Austin's Report, in which the witness alluded to states that he had on one occasion four blankets given to him for the most destitute persons of his parish. Endeavouring to discover the fittest objects of the bounty, he found that amongst eighty-four individuals there were but thirty-five blankets—of these ten were tolerably good, as they had been in use only four years, but twenty-five were completely worn out.) Thus you see that this is not a sudden case of distress, but the constant and permanent condition of the agricultural labourer. ( Hear, hear.) The periods of manufacturing distress are, after all, remote—certainly not permanent—and we charge them upon your bad legislation.—( Hear, hear) ( The Hon. Gen tleman then read further extracts to show the crowded state of the cabins in Dorsetshire, and the frightful immorality of their inmates.) You talk of the immorality of our manu fa, turiug towns—what can you show us to equal this ? Your villages are normal schools for vice and prostitution.—( Hear. ) You cannot blame us for the vices of our towns, if you rear the people thus and send them into our towns.—(Hear, hear.) I say emphatically 1 do not attack individuals, but a system. Although I hold the proprietor to be resposible for the state of lodging on his own land, I do not hold him responsible for the price of wages. I never held the farmers responsible for the price of wages, although it has been foolishly said of me that 1 did so. I challenge the Argus-fled opponent I have to deal with, to show that I have ever done so.—( Great cheering.) What does Mr. Austin say of clothing —you have heard what he said of food and lodging? He says, that to have a change of clothing was all nonsense. If a woman came home with wet clothes from her work, she must put them on in the morning as wet as when she came home. —( Hear.) And yet you tell us that these are our great home customers. —( Cheers and laughter. ) Lincolnshire is an exception.—(Hear, hear, from Col. Sib thorp. ) It is an exception both with regard to the condition of the farmer and the labourer.—(The Hen. Gentleman then adverted to the wretched condition of the farmers and farm labourers in Scotland and Wales, and quoted the description of the state of the population of the latter country given by the reporter of the Times.) I need hardly' re er to the condition of the population of the sister country across the Channel. It is acknow ledged that there are 2,500,000 destitute persons in that country. They are frequently on the point of famine ; and yet, at this moment there is a duty of 18s. 3d. a quar ter on the corn imported into that country.—( Hear, hear. ) ( The lion. Gentleman then quoted from the Report of Dr. Southwood Smith, respecting the state of the fever hospitals, in which there were 1,462 patients, being 418 more than in preceding y ears , an d consisting chiefly of persons coming from the agricultural districtelseeking for labour.—(Hear, hear.) I have now given a description of the state of the agricultural population ; and I ask of the Members of Counties, whether they are not put out of court ? There is no class of the country benefited by these laws, and all I ask is, that we should have a Select Committee to inquire into the facts.—( Hear, hear. ) Yon don't want an Act of Parliament to protect the farmer; you want a fresh bargain with him. You want leases upon fresh terms. The men I should bring to be examined before the Committee would tell you how they could employ more labourers. They would tell you that they could do so by breaking up some of that old land which is lying not under grass, but under moss, and has been lying in that way for, perhaps, a hundred years, in order to please some landlord who prefars seeing in that state to seeing corn growing there or the plough passing over it. All such coxcombry as that would disappear before such a practical farmer as my Lord Ducie, who would he ready to come and tell you what to do. You would derive immense advantage from the examination that would be gone into in such a Committee as that which I propose. Men would be examined who look upon land as we look on our raw material in our manufactures, as that which is to give employment to the people. We have now advantages presented to us for holding this Com mittee that we have never had before. Recollect, that hitherto you have not heard two sides of the question be fore your Agricultural Committees. Now I wish to impress this to on the Right lion. Gentleman opposite (Sir R. Peel) —I strut gly appeal to him to allow me to have this Committee. There have never yet been two sides of the question stated in Committees of this House. The witnesses that have been examined were all in favour of protection. You have never had any enlightened agriculturist brought forward to state both sides of the question. In the evidend u taken in 1836, great doubt was expressed as to the value of an intervention by Act of Parliament. No direct evidence, however, was brought forward as to whether it would nut be better to get rid of the old system altogether, and adopt a system of perfect free trade. Now it is on that ground that 1 especially appeal to Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Ido not want men examined who are farmers only. Let them he landowners if you choose. I would respectfully ask Lord Ducie and Earl Spencer first. I presume that the Duke of Buckingham and the Duke of Richmond would be chosen by r gentlemen opposite.—(Laughter.) There is nothing that I should more wish to see than four noblemen brought before the Committee, and subjected to a cross-examination. We would take your Noblemen and you should take ours.—(Laughter.) This is what I should wish to see. But, however, you have Hon. Gentlemen on your own side of the House who make out my case altogether. There is the lion. Member for Berk shire who well knows what the land is capable of, who knows what is wanting, and who knows that those districts where there is the most pauperism and distress are the very places in which farming is most neglected. Ile says, " I wish to sec more drains cut, and more lime used, and more mime procured ; and I should like to see their cattle fat tened up, which have hitherto been starved." Here is testi mony, you see, from your own side, that nothing is right. Now suppose )ou could read a book upon manufactures, in which you could show that every thing was wrong that we 'manufac turers were doing. Suppose a theorist could come to me in my business, which is the manufacture of garments—things almost as necessary in a civilised land and cold climate as corn—(Laughter) —now, suppose this theorist were to come to me in my manufactory and say, " You must bring your indigo from India, your madder from France, your gum from Africa, your cotton from Ame rica, and compound all these together, and you can then make a peasant's gown for two shillings." Why, this is all done. They are doing this daily in my manufactory. It does not require a theorist to tell us to do it. If we did not do it we could not carry on our competition with each other and with other countries. This, however, can be said to you.—" You have materials moul dering at your own door. You have only to get over a hedge —to dig under the surface—to improve the condition of your people." We should make great advances in agriculture if this Committee were to be appointed. I know that you would have a majority of protectionists on that Committee. I am perfectly willing that you should have it. I know that—l understand at least that there is a sort of etiquette in tl.is House by which the mover of a Committee is appointed Chairman of that Committee. Now I waive all pretension to that office. I will sit as a humble individual in the minority; all I ask is to be there. What possible objection can you raise to it? I cannot understand what objection there can be. Are you afraid that it will increase the agitation ? I ask the Hon. Ba ronet, the Member for Essex, whether he thinks the agitation is going down in his part of the country ? I understand they have lately raised a large sum of money in Essex. Now do you think that the appointment of a dozen gentlemen, to act in a room foe the purpose of taking evidence, would add anything to the excitement out of doors on this subject ? Why, by the ap pointment of this Committee you would draw me away.__ ( Laughter.) I tell you what will cause excitement. Excite merit will be caused if you refuse this Committee, and allow me to go down to the counties with your votes in my hand, and say, " I only asked for inquiry. I offered them a majority of their own party, and offered to go into the Committee merely as a member of the Committee, and not as the Chairman. I offered them every possible advantage in the Committee, and they would not, or they dare not, grant me that Committee of Inquiry." Now, I desire to have no advantage of that sort. If you let us have the Committee, let us set to work with a desire, if possible, to elicit a fund of information which shall be beneficial to the country. ( H,ar, hear.) I feel that much good would be done by this Committee. Ido believe that the system at present pursued, instead of being a protection to agriculture is the destruc tion of agriculture. Let us see if our Committee cannot counteract some of the effects of the foolishness—l will not use a harder name—which, under the pretence of protecting native industry, has been allowed to go forth, by which the farmers have been induced to depend upon an Act of Parliament for prosperity, rather than upon their own energies. Let us conduct the Committee as though we wished to elicit facts —as though we wished to counteract the mischiefs of that system, than which I cannot imagine any thieg more demoralising—for such a system deserves no better title than a system of demoralisation. What is it that you tell the farmers? You get them to feel that they cannot compete with other men. You bring long lists of figures and delusive accounts, showing that the culti vation of an acre must cost 6/. or 81., and then you tell them to compare that with the cost in Russia. You put every impediment in the way of their doing that which they ought to do. Do you think that is the way to make men succeed in anything ? How should we do ? We who are ma nufacturers. If we get a pattern of some rival manufacture abroad, should we call our men together, and say, " It is quite clear we cannot compete with the foreigner ; it is quite useless to compete with Germany or America ?" IVe don't do that, but what do wo do? Why, we call our men together, and we say " Such and such a thing is being done else where ; now we are Englishmen, and whether these things are done by Russians or Germans, we will do it."—(Cheers. ) I believe that the present system is demoralizing the people. The Noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire, had no right to go down to the agricultural meeting at Liverpool and tell the farmers that they ought not to do as their grandfathers had done before them, merely content themselve s b y putt i ng one foot before the other. He had no right to talk to them in that way. What is it makes them do so? Why, every man who comes here or who goes to Lancashire and talks about our " invasion of corn" from a place in Russia which shall be nameless—(Cheers and laughter) —the men who come here and tell us to look to protection instead of looking to our own energies —these are the men who rause the farmers to put their hands behind their backs, and it is that which prevents them from being equal, if not superior, farmers to any on the face of the earth. I be lieve that much good will result from such a Com mittee as that which I proposed, because I believe that the present system is as injurious to agriculture as it is to manufactures. It is because I believe that it robs the earth of its fertility—robs the labourer of his hire—cheats the people of their subsistence, and robs the farmer of his independence,— it is because I believe all this that I hope you will accede to the motion which I now make—" That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the effects of protective duties on imports upon the in terests of the tenant-farmers and farm-labourers of this country."—(Loud cheers.) Mr. GLADSTONE could not but acknowledge the general moderation arid tone of the language of the speech which the Hon. Gentleman had just addressed to the House. He hoped the Horn Gentleman would allow him to congratulate him upon the manner in which that speech had been delivered. The Hon. Gentleman had commenced his speech by ad verting to a certain case which had occurred in Dorsetshire, the particulars of which he (Mr. Gladstone) was not ac quainted with. The Hon. Gentleman said that it appeared from inquiries which had been made by the public authorities that a number of human beings were living together in a wretched hovel, under circumstances the most degrading to them, and most diegracesul to those who were placed over them. lie (Mr. Gladstone) felt sure that the sorrow which had been expressed by the Honour able Gentleman with respect to this case, was shared by both sides of the House. But although this case had been referred to by the lion. Gentleman, it could not be supposed that that was a specimen of the state of the:rural districts throughout the country. If the Hon. Gentleman could show to the House that such was the state, of the rural dist r i c t s , th en h e (M r. G) would acknowledge that he had removed one of the most powerful impediments which stood in the way of the proposal which the Hon. Gentleman had recommended. Now with regard to the motion which had been made by the Hon. Gentleman. He (Mr. Gladstone) confessed that he did not think that the speech of the Hon. Gentleman corresponded much with the terms of his motion. The motio n o f the Hon. Gentleman was for a Select Committee to inquire into the operation of pro tective duties on imports upon the interests of the tenant farmers and farm labourers of this country. He_(lllr. Glad s t one ) confessed, in following the speeeh of the Right Hon. Gentleman, that it was difficult to discover what really was the obj ec t which was sought to be obtained by this Committee. Many por tions of the speech of the lion. Gentleman had applied to sub jects which the Select Committee, for which the Hon. Gen tlemen bad moved, could certainly not entertain. The Hon. Gentleman had bestowed a considerable portion of his speech on describing the rural population in particular di s t r i c t s . H e had alluded to the popul at i on of certain districts in four coun ties. Now he (Mr. Gladstone) would not agree to the pro • position that this was a true specimen of the state of those four counties, but he thought it would b e part i cu l ar l y unreasonable to suppose that those counties represented the whole of the rural districts of England. A large part of the speech of the Hon. Gentleman appeared to him (Mr. Gladstone) to point to some proposition for a Committee to inquire into the state of the agricultural labouring population. If such was the lion. Gentleman's object, he (Mr. Gladstone) ap prehended that the proposition now before the House would not meet it. If such a subject as the condition of the agri cultural population of this country were to be considered in such a Committee as that which had been moved for by the Hon. Gentleman, it would materially be mixed up with such a number of different questions of political economy, that no beneficial results would ensue. He believed if the Committee were to be appointed under such circumstances that the Hun. Gentleman must sacrifice all hope of conferring any advantage upon agriculture. The Hon. Gentleman said that it was ne cessary to have a Committee in order to establish the fact, that the House had not the power of fixing the price of agricultural commodities. Now b e f ore he (Mr. Glad stone) assented to the appointment of such a Com mittee, he would like to know whether it had been proved that any lion. Gentleman in that House had maintained that it was in their power to fix that price.—( Hear, hear.) Now this Committee, if it were intended for anything, was for the purpose of converting the majority of that House to the opinions entertained by the Hen. Gentleman. The lion. Gentleman had said that thedepreciation in the price of cattle was not attributable to the operation of the tariff, but was to be asctibed to the impoverishment of the consumer. In this opitlien he (Mr. Gladstone) coincided, but he doubted whether the Committee for which the Hon. Gentleman had moved could le g itimately inv es ti ga t e th a t su bj ect . Th e H on . Gen tlemen iad addressed himself to the subject of the proporticn of rent to the expenses of a farm. He had read a statement, from which the expenses of some farms had reached 790/., while the rent was 800/. Now he (Mr. Gladstone) had no means of denying the accuracy of that statement, but even supposing it to be correct, was that a criterion to go by with respect to the whole country ? The Hon. Gentleman had argued the question of protection in the abstract—the question assumed a very different aspect when it was considered with reference to a new commercial system, to that which it did when considered in connection with a great mass of the population whose labour had been influenced by a system of protection. The Hon. Gentleman said he did not so much complain of the corn-law on account of its enhancing the price of wheat, as he did on account of the fluctuations which it caused. Now he (Mr. Gladstone) very much doubted whe ther a Select Committee could inquire whether the fluctuations in the price of corn were to be ascribed to the present corn law. That was a subject for debate by the whole' House. The Hon. Gentleman contended that protection was injurious to the tenant farmer and to the farmer's labourer, but there were gentlemen in that House ready to argue in favour of the other side of the question. The Hon. Member for Wiltshire had argued with much ingenuity and truth, that the removal ,of protection would be injurious to both these classes. If the. landlord was pressed upon by the Legislature, he might himself become a farmer, and take the cultivation of these lands into his own hands, or be might throw his lands into the hands of a class, who would farm on a much more extensive and econo. mical scale of management, and who would be possessed of far greater capital than the present occupiers. Cheaper produce might then be obtained, but it did not follow that it would be wise in the House to adopt a course which would lead to such a violent disruption—( Hear, hear)—and which would be so manifestly injurious to a csnsiderable hulk of the population. Many were seriously of opinion that the danger of causing the displacement of so much rural labour was in itself a good and valid argument against a repeal of the corn-laws. Was it not perfectly possible that in the change contemplated by the Hon. Gentleman, the landlord might, of the three classes (landlords, tenants, and labourers) suffer least ?—( Hear, hear.) The land of Northamptonshire, it etas said, was best adapted to grazing —the manufacturers declared there would be an in creased demand for meat if the corn-laws were repealed, so that here, at least, the landlord would not be the loser. That might be a good argument for the landlord, but how did it aly to the labourer? G raz i ng f arms occupied comparatively fe pp w la bourers; what then would become of these poor people if grazing became prevalent—those men who had been bred to agricultural pu rsu it s , an d k new noth i ng else ? Why they would b brought to ruin and destruction.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman argued that machinery was not the cause of dis. tress. Other Hon. Gentlemen were prepared to argue that distress did not result from the corn-laws. He did not think - it would be wise or prudent in Hon. Members to discuss at large the question of the corn-laws.—( Ironical cries of " Hear, hear" from the Opposition.) There were those who believed the corn-laws were not the cause of the distress in the manu factoring districts, but the means of alleviating it; and he thought those who built their theory of free trade on such pre mises, could not long support it. He could not think that the Hon. Gentleman really contemplated a Select Committee as the fittest tribunal for such complicated, abstract, and grave questions to be dealt with ; he was rather of opinion that the Hon. Member had other views in the motion. First, it afforded him an opportunity of making a speech upon the corn-laws ; secondly, it gave him the power of refusing the Chairmanship of the pro posed Committee ; an d l ast l y i t would enable him to collect the different opinions of the Hon. Members of that House. He (Mr. Gladstone) could not suppose how the question of rent, for instance, which must necessarily enter into the projected investigation, could be dealt with by such a tribunal. It was a most abstract and difficult question of po litical economy that had engaged the undivided attention of such men as Smith, Malthus, and Ricardo, and could not be properly considered when mixed up with such heterogenous and conflicting subjects. Now, what was a Select Committee ? It was a body to which, whilst sitting, the House might be said to have delegated its authority as related to the subject of its in quiry, and its objects should be to furnish the House with in formation on that subject. He could not assent to its nomina tion. One necessary condition of the concession of the motion would be, that the question of the corn-laws should not be agi tated in that House during the sitting of the Committee. Were lion. Members opposite prepared to submit to that condition? Mr. BRIGHT—We have no objection. Mr. GLADSTONE—Was the Hon. Member aware of the time such a Committee must consume in its investigations ? What were the subjects of inquiry ? The rates of freight from foreign countries to this—the power of Parliament to regulate the prices of corn—an examination into the doctrine of rent— an inquiry into the condition of the agricultural population, not only of England, but of Scotl an d an d Ireland. Then there were fifteen gentlemen with fifteen different pets of opinions, who put fifteen kinds of questions to witnesses. It was clear that the Anti. Corn-law League must adjourn its sittings sine die. Mr. BRIGHT—I did not say the League, but this House. Mr. GLA DSTONE—WeII, then,, he doubted if the Hon. Gentleman's associates were prepared to submit to this pro traction of discussion, even in the House, for the labours of this Committee (particularly as the greater number of it would be probably composed of protectionists) might be pro longed from session to session.--( Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition.) Even though its sitting might not be so long, still he hardly thought the Hon. Member for Wolverhampto n , for instance, wh o h a d ment i oned his intention of treating the House to its regular annual discussion on the cern.laws, would be satisfied at the postponement of the question. Mr. MILNER GIBSON—No. Mr. GLADSTONE—Nor the Hon. Member for Manches ter, he perceived. Well, then, it would stultify the House to appoint a Select Committee, and yet discuss the subject of its investigation during its sitting. If the Committee were appointed they would unsettle the minds of the people, and paralyse those departments of trade and revenue to which its inquiries had reference. His argument was, that no- thing could be done with a Select Committee which could not be done without it. The House was already in possession of all the information which a Committee could be expected to obtain. The appointment of the Committee would add to the agitation which at present prevailed, and what was still worse would add to the appre hension.—( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) Whether agitation was good or bad, this country, he believed, could bear a larger quantity of it than any others without suffering any detriment, as long at least as that agitation was only on the surface. Ile had a strong impression that the League, however active or able its members, under present circumstances, as long as Providence gave the people the en joyment of plenty, as long as Parliament and the Govern ment regarded those pledges, expressed or implied, which they had given the country—the League he said might not be regarded with any serious apprehension, the ceremony at-- tending it was, perhaps, the most important part of its pro ceedings. —( Laughter.) The Right Hon. Baronet had already explained the views of the Government, these views the Go vernment still held.—( Cheers from the Ministerial benches. ) The appointment of a Committee especially considering who the mover for it was, would lead the people to think that there was a foregone conclusion on the part of the House to disturb the corn-laws—the Government would be justly reproached with improper levity. Confidence in the Legislature would be shaken; agricultural enterprise would be checked, and trade would be embarrassed. For the sake of these things, and for the good of the people, he would oppose the present motion. Mr. n AWES said a more unsatisfactory or trivial speech than that of the Right lion. Gentleman who had just sat down he had never heard. It was absurd to say the qnestionof rent must enter into the subject matter of inquiry of a Select Com mittee. When Agricultural Committees had been hitherto ape pointed by this House, not for the purpose of lowering but of raising protection, the question of rent was not considered then. Why should it now, when protection was sought to be removed? —( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Stockport had clearly shown that the greatest moral and physical degradation ex isted in the country, and even if the labours of a Committee were extended over several sessions, it ought not to be refused en that ground. If there was no evil in the system of protec tion, and if inquiry would not expose that evil, why shrink from it ?—( Hear, hear.) They were questions of fact that would come before the Committee. The Right Hen. Gentle man had talked of the plentiful harvest, but he (Mr. Hawes) thought that policy was indeed unsafe which depended upon fa vourable moments of sunshine and the chance Of good weather.. —( Hear, hear.) They could not always expect such harvests as those of 1835 and 1836, when corn was so low in price; they were contrary to experience, and were exceptions to the rule ; and yet by those exceptions the Right Hon. Gentleman wished to legislate. Then with regard to pledges, bethought it did not become Right Honourable Gentlemen opposite to talk of pledges, who had pledged themselves to the old system of corn-laws now for ever abandoned.--( Hear, hear.) ( The lion. Gentleman then read an extract from the speech of Lord Liverpool, in introducing the corn-law of 1815, to show that the Noble Lord's object at that time was to mitigate the evil that resulted from the fall in prices, and to prevent the new adjustment or compromise which otherwise must have taken place between the owners and the occupiers of land. Ile then continued to ask if no such adjustment had since taken place, and if they did not hear every day of rents falling, and of abatements taking place in the landlord's de mands.) The law of 1815 was therefore, he would maintain, intended not to produce greater regularity in prices, but to meet a special case which had long since passed away ; and those who would rely on the case made by Lord Liver pool to support the existing law, should consequently be prepared to do away with a corn-law altoge ther.—( Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Gentleman said if the Committee were granted that prices would stagnate, and that men's minds would become unsettled on the question of corn-laws. He thought a stronger argument than that was he had never heard. They saw the mind of no man settled on the question, and when public opinion out of doors became well directed, as he thought it likely soon to be, under his Hon- Friend the Member for Stockport, he would not be inclined to attach much weight to the opposition of the Right Hon. Gen tleman.—( Hear, hear.) They were at this very moment about to have a Committee on tobacco, and they had also Com mittees on the timber trade and on various other branches of commerce, and he would ask were they the means of producing any great fluctuation in trade?-_-( Hear.) It was not by the appointment or the inquiries of Committees that trade in the articles which the Committees were appointed to investigate was affected, but it was by the course taken by the Government respecting them. When the Government said " No" to the popular demand, it was understood that no immediate alteration. was likely to take place ; but nobody believed that by giving a negative the Government intended to persevere in doing SCA longer than circumstances rendered prudent or expedient,— ( Hear. ) The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the Hon. Mem ber for Stockport had not traced the distress of the country to the corn-laws ; but he (Mr. Hawes) thought otherwise. When he had referred to the injury done by the corn-laws to the working men, he had little expected to find a good anti apposite proof of his allegation in the Report of one of the Commis-- sinners sent down by the Government to inquire into the state of education in Norfolk. In the Report of that Commission for 1840 and 1841 it was stated that wages did net rise in proportion, to the increase in the price of corn. The Hon. Gentleman then read tome extracts from the Report, in which the cases of two families of agricultural labourers were given. In one the man earned 12s. a week, or 465. a month, and his son 4s. a week, or 16s. a month, making in all 645. a month ; out of which 535. were paid for a bag of flour for their support, leaving only 9s. applicable to. other purposes. In the other case, which occurred in 1841, the , labourer earned I ls. a week and his son 3s a week, making in, all 565. a month, while the cost of a bag of flour war 425.. leaving 14s. applicable to general purposes. He then continued to say that there were other similar cases given in the Re port, all showing that a fluctuation in prices produced a fluctua tion in the miseries of the poor.—(Hear. ) He thought they ought to take into consideration the class to whom the inquiry would be confined if the Committee were appointed. The. witnesses that it was proposed to examine would be landlords, and farmers, who would be interested in the means by which rent was to be paid. Now, if the payment of rent depended, as he believed would be allowed, on the surplus of produce, and on the capital and skill embarked in raising the produce, it must necessarily follow that all those requisites were materially affectedto the fa b r y me r. whatever But, would asked, ou ld did h give the greatest t e am corn-lawso amount tof ensuresecurity that. security? From 1815 to the present meant, every corn-law: t t he hat a h g a ricu db lt e t e a n is i t n s tirnodcuoneesdtanhtadingsercaudruiatyllyabnd rokdeonubsirif,(lllareaevil He considered the speech of the Right Hon. Gentlemais. as being in reality one in support of the motion of his lion. Prima, for it had altogether failed in showing that the tenant-farmers and labourers had any interest in the continuance of the corn laws; and by refusing the Committee, with such a speech, the Right Hon. Gentleman merely invited them to go into the subject again ; for instead of waiting for a repeal of the corn laws until the country was plunged into misery by bad harvests,. when it was to be inferred they would have no difficulty in. procuring it, they should rather endeavour to have. the qucsticn settled while they were blessed with come MR. O'CONNELL. The reception given to Mr. O'Connell at Birmingham is a sign of the times. It indicates the wonderful change which has been wrought within the last few weeks in the public mind of England. Six months ago Mr. O'Connell was not popular in this country, however much idolised in his own. We enter into no speculations as to the causes of this. The causes of the change which has since taken place can be mistaken by no one. They are clear as the sum mer sun, They lie on the surface. The State trials " have done it all." Persecution has made the " Con spirator" what he is in England. The triumph which attends his appearance in the metropolis, and his pro gress through the provinces, is the result of a general conviction that he is the victim of a tyrannical Govern ment ; for it is one of the most marked attributes of the English character, to feel and express sympathy with those who are treated with harshness or injustice. From mere personal considerations, therefore, had there been no other, Mr. O'Connell could have con fidently relied on a cordial reception in England, after the efforts which a Tory Government has made to crush him. But there are other and higher con siderations than any of a pure personal nature, mixed up with the extraordinary enthusiasm with which the "Conspirator" is everywhere received in this country. In his person, and in the persons of his co-" conspirators," a deadly blow has been aimed at some of the most cherished principles of the Constitution. The right of free discussion, and of holding public meetings, was violently assailed by the recent proceedings in Ireland. The integrity of trial by jury too, was grossly attacked by the mode in which Ministers conducted the State prosecutions. O'Connell has not had a fair trial. Legal forms were trampled upon by the Attorney-General. And he who filled the principal seat on the Bench, sacri ficed the sacred impartiality and dignified gravity of the judge to the one-sided views and vehement partisan • ship of the advocate. A more objectionable charge never proceeded from judicial lips. In every flee the leanings of the judge were so visible as to render it im possible for any one to mistake them. Mr. Justice Pen nefather was with the Government and against the traversers. With such a jury and such a judge, need we wonder at the result? No feeling of amazement was expressed when the verdict was returned ; no such feel ing was, or could be, entertained. Now, in all this the people of England not only see the gross injustice to Mr. 0 Connell, and a flagrant contravention of the law of the land as regards the manner in which State prosecutions ought to be conducted, but they discover the most ample ground for apprehension in reference to themselves. If the Constitution is to be set at defiance in Ireland, why not in England ? If the rights and liberties of the subject are to be outraged in the person of Mr. O'Connell, what more more natural than that they should be equally set at nought in the person of Mr. Cobden ? If it were right to put down the Repeal agitation in Ireland before any breach of the public peace could be laid to its charge, it is equally right that the Corn law agitation should be crushed in England. If it was constitutional to issue a proclamation against the meet ing of Clontarf, it must be equally in accordance with our rights and liberties that a proclamation should be issued against the League meetings in Covent-garden. If it was right to proceed against the eight individuals lately arraigned in the Queen's Bench of Dub. lin, it must be equally proper to proceed against the Council of the League in the Queen's Bench in London. If Mr. O'Connell and his co-tra versers were "conspirators," so are Messrs. Cobden, Bright, Wilson, &c. If the former were guilty of " con- ihre s the